Replies: 2 comments 7 replies
|
Hey @janosh! I am technical marketing engineer with ALCHEMI. These numbers for NL in Toolkit-Ops are not what we expected, and I would like to have a closer look if possible. Can you, please, share the structures you are testing on and potentially benchmark suite or script? Thanks a lot |
|
Hi @janosh — I've been investigating this and have some findings to share, but first a quick question: what version of NequIP were you running for this benchmark? With Want to make sure we're looking at the same code before posting our full analysis. |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
posting this here for later reference and as a prompt in case others have related/contradictory results worth sharing: NL benchmark comparing
matscipy,vesin,ase,alchemion 1, 10, 100, 1000 structure relaxations using Nequip-OAM-L + LBFGS running on single H200 withInflightAutoBatcher,f_max=5e-3,max_steps=1000main surprise was that
nvalchemi-toolkit-ops==0.2.0didn't provide a speedup even though it's the (only?) GPU-compatible batched neighbor list implementation.vesinbeats it at every structure count andmatscipynot far behind. maybe i didn't usenvalchemi-toolkit-ops==0.2.0correctly but i thought there's no setup.aseis the main outlier, lot slower than the other 3EDIT (this was user error, i.e. my mistake): see below for 2x speedup results when actually batching NL construction on GPU: #452 (reply in thread)
All reactions