[gmx-users] programmes to have in double precision besides mdrun_d
gmx3 at hotmail.com
Wed Jun 17 16:06:53 CEST 2009
> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 15:17:53 +0200
> From: erikm at xray.bmc.uu.se
> To: gmx-users at gromacs.org
> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] programmes to have in double precision besides mdrun_d
> Jussi Lehtola skrev:
> > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 13:45 +0200, Berk Hess wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >> Nothing needs to be double precision.
> >> Why do you want mdrun in double precision?
> >> The only common reason for this is normal mode analysis,
> >> in which case you need all the tools involved in double precision.
> >> For normal MD simulation there is nearly never a need for
> >> double precision.
> > If you want to run accurate NVE simulations, double precision is
> > important. If you use thermostats, then there is no need for double
> > precision.
> I can testify to that. Without double precision I've had problems with
> drifting total energy when doing non-periodic NVE.
Indeed, this is correct.
But I guess this falls into the category nearly never.
On the other hand, there are so many Gromacs users nowadays,
there nearly never is nearly never zero users.
> > Also, I have found that double precision can be nice for energy
> > minimization since it can handle more pathological cases than single
> > precision. Still, usually it doesn't matter much whether the starting
> > point was prepared in single or double precision.
It would be nice if we could make the single precision code
handle such cases better (force capping?).
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users