Flood Modeller-TUFLOW Benchmarking: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Tuflowduncan (talk | contribs) |
No edit summary |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<Br>
=Flood Modeller-TUFLOW Benchmarking=
==Introduction==
The fixed grid TUFLOW software is available in 2 solvers, an implicit finite-difference solver which is now branded as TUFLOW Classic, and an explicit finite volume engine called TUFLOW HPC which stands for Heavily Parallelised Compute. The solution scheme for TUFLOW HPC has highly independent calculations which can be parallelised and when run over multiple processors or on a GPU card provides a significant reduction in run times.
The following wiki post highlights the potential speed up that could be achieved with utilisation of the TUFLOW HPC engine using GPU card technology:-
[[
The benchmark models in these tests are 2D only models or 1D-2D models which utilise TUFLOW 1D ESTRY engine. The speed up is due to 2D calculations being distributed across multiple processors and undertaken in parallel. The impact of the parallel processing is also seen in integrated 1D-2D models. As well as
In conjunction with TUFLOW's own 1D engine which allows the modelling and integration of pipe network models and river models together with a 2D domain, TUFLOW can also be integrated with a range of other 1-Dimensional software including <u>[https://www.floodmodeller.com/ Flood Modeller Pro]</u> amongst others.
==Flood Modeller Pro-TUFLOW Benchmarking==
A common query is what is the speed up of running simulations utilising TUFLOW HPC and GPU technology when TUFLOW models are linked to external 1D schemes such as Flood Modeller Pro. Therefore, some benchmarking runs of linked Flood Modeller Pro-TUFLOW models
The benchmark simulations have been undertaken internally and
==Model 1==
Line 29 ⟶ 30:
The TUFLOW version used for the simulations was the 2018-03-AC release and Flood Modeller 4.4.
The results of the benchmarking of model 1 are shown in Table 1. The implicit TUFLOW Classic scheme is comparable to the TUFLOW HPC when
'''Table 1: Runtimes for Flood Modeller Pro-TUFLOW benchmarks'''
{| align="center" class="wikitable"
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=5% | GPU RAM (GB)
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=10% | TUFLOW Classic Runtime (s)
Line 42 ⟶ 43:
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=10% | TUFLOW HPC Runtime (s) on 8 Cores
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=10% | TUFLOW HPC Runtime (s) on GPU Card
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=
|-
|Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7820x CPU @ 3.60GHz ||NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080||8||6041||8071||4718||3502||1022||83%
Line 48 ⟶ 49:
|Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7820x CPU @ 3.6 Ghz ||Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 ti||11||5944||8611||5666||4567||726||88%
|-
|Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7700 HQ CPU @ 2.8 Ghz ||Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050||4||6622||10867||7857||
|-
|}
Line 54 ⟶ 55:
==Model 2==
The second model contains 228 Flood Modeller Pro nodes, a 5m resolution TUFLOW grid with a total of 570,214 cells. The model was run for 26 hours of model time with a 100 year boundary condition. The TUFLOW Classic model was run with a 1.25 second timestep. Table 2 shows the run times for model 2 when run with the same scenarios
'''Table 2: Runtimes for Flood Modeller Pro-TUFLOW benchmarks for Model 2'''
{| align="center" class="wikitable"
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=5% | GPU RAM (GB)
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=10% | TUFLOW Classic Runtime (s)
Line 67 ⟶ 68:
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=10% | TUFLOW HPC Runtime (s) on 8 Cores
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=10% | TUFLOW HPC Runtime (s) on GPU Card
! style="background-color:#005581; font-weight:bold; color:white;" width=
|-
|Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-7820x CPU @ 3.6 Ghz ||Nvidia GeForce RTX 2080 ti||11||5946||10229||6543||4722||1251||79%
Line 73 ⟶ 74:
|Intel(R) Xeon(TM) E5-2670 v3 CPU @ 2.3 Ghz ||Nvidia GeForce GTX 980||4||19693||21242||14438||9516||3603||82%
|-
|Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-770HQ CPU @ 2.8 Ghz ||Nvidia GeForce GTX 1050||4||
|-
|}
Line 79 ⟶ 80:
==Discussion==
The results from the benchmarking of the hydraulic runs
The simulation times were
| |||