[CP2K-user] [CP2K:18231] Re: How to Gaussian type calculations and Performance

[DMT]

Also, without MIXING the micro-iterations take average 5.8 seconds and 
there is a total of 16 of them (half from before).

On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 4:27:41 PM UTC+2 DMT wrote:

> Without the MIXING the calculation time dropped to only 5x - 6x times that 
> of Gaussian (from 10x).
>
> The subroutines' timings seem proportionate to those before, just less 
> total time.
>
> The total Energy is exactly the same a before: -238.613 Hartree, compared 
> to Gaussian's -240.219 Hartree. Without HF Ex for m062x -219.981.
>
> On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 4:15:17 PM UTC+2 DMT wrote:
>
>> Dear Marcella,
>>
>> !!!> Yes, I had posted the wrong input file. Now I am attaching the real 
>> one + the output.
>>
>> Thank you for clarifying the MIXING option.
>>
>> On an average a single micro-iteration takes 6.2 seconds, the total 
>> number of micro-iterations for convergence is 33.
>>
>> The first 11 subroutines seem to take the most time:
>>
>>  CP2K                                 1  1.0    0.046    0.046  210.153 
>>  210.153
>>  qs_energies                          1  2.0    0.000    0.000  209.392 
>>  209.392
>>  scf_env_do_scf                       1  3.0    0.000    0.000  208.603 
>>  208.603
>>  scf_env_do_scf_inner_loop           33  4.0    0.002    0.002  208.603 
>>  208.603
>>  qs_ks_update_qs_env                 33  5.0    0.000    0.000  182.059 
>>  182.059
>>  rebuild_ks_matrix                   33  6.0    0.000    0.000  182.057 
>>  182.057
>>  qs_ks_build_kohn_sham_matrix        33  7.0    0.003    0.003  182.057 
>>  182.057
>>  hfx_ks_matrix                       33  8.0    0.000    0.000  110.000 
>>  110.000
>>  integrate_four_center               33  9.0    1.361    1.361  109.993 
>>  109.993
>>  integrate_four_center_main          33 10.0    0.180    0.180  106.232 
>>  106.232
>>  integrate_four_center_bin         1610 11.0  106.052  106.052  106.052 
>>  106.052,
>>
>> the rest take below 30 average total time.
>>
>> As for the column ASL, the largest are:
>> pw_scatter_s                       562 13.2<-ASL (the second number)
>> fft3d_s                           1134 12.7
>> fft_wrap_pw1pw2_200                597 11.9
>> integrate_four_center_bin         1610 11.0
>> xc_pw_derive                       198 11.0
>> fft_wrap_pw1pw2                   1133 10.7
>> integrate_four_center_main          33 10.0
>> xc_rho_set_and_dset_create          33 10.0
>> xc_pw_divergence                    33 10.0
>> .
>> On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 3:36:27 PM UTC+2 Marcella Iannuzzi wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Dobomir,
>>>
>>> The posted input refers to a pseudo potential calculation using GPW and 
>>> not to an ALL electron calculation using GAPW. 
>>> In this case the total energies of Gaussian and CP2K are not comparable.
>>> But maybe you posted the wrong file. 
>>> Anyway, for molecules please remove the Broyden mixing, which is a 
>>> G-space mixing. 
>>> Concerning the timings, is the single iteration time too long or the 
>>> number of iterations to convergence too large?
>>> In the final timings written in the output it is possible to check which 
>>> part of the calculation is taking large portion of the allocated resources. 
>>>
>>> Kind regards
>>> Marcella
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tuesday, December 20, 2022 at 2:01:25 PM UTC+1 DMT wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> I am new to CP2K and this is my first post in the group. I have heard 
>>>> many positive things about the program and I want to study it. First I want 
>>>> to learn how to do the kind of calculations I am already used to use other 
>>>> software for.
>>>>
>>>> I have several questions and I'm mainly interested in organic systems.
>>>>
>>>> I picked a very simple metalo-organic complex for test of accuracy, 
>>>> properties and speed (my resources are not unlimited).
>>>>
>>>> The Gaussian calculation I chose to repeat is very simple - Single 
>>>> Point (Energy run) with m062x functional and def2-tzvp basis set. I used 
>>>> the CP2K Energy tutorial and managed to put together the attached input 
>>>> file.
>>>>
>>>> To my understanding I have to use QS > METHOD GAPW in order to apply 
>>>> the basis set, which I downloaded in CP2K format from the Basis Set 
>>>> Exchange web site.
>>>> Since the system is not PERIODIC I used POISSON_SOLVER WAVELET.
>>>> I have left DIAGONALIZATION ON with ALGORITHM STANDARD.
>>>> I also left MIXING T and used BROYDEN_MIXING with ALPHA 0.4 (default) 
>>>> and NBROYDEN 8 (from input examples).
>>>> I assume in MGRID: NGRIDS 5 and CUTOFF 400 are good values (from other 
>>>> inputs)
>>>> In the &XC_FUNCTIONAL I used &HYB_MGGA_X_M06_2X and in the &HF section 
>>>> I placed FRACTION 0.54 (54% HF Exchange is the default in m062x).
>>>> In the KIND X sections I wrote BASIS_SET def2-tzvp and POTENTIAL ALL, 
>>>> which to my understanding forces no core potential at all, but instead uses 
>>>> all electrons from the basis. I noticed that in the &DFT section I had to 
>>>> place POTENTIAL_FILE_NAME POTENTIAL, because although I'm not using a 
>>>> potential CP2K gives an error if I don't provide a potential file. I took 
>>>> the file from the "data" dir of the cp2k source code. <<< Is this the 
>>>> correct way to do it, when there is no potential ?
>>>> My ABC setting in &CELL is 12 12 12, although the system is quite a bit 
>>>> smaller in distances between nuclear coordinates - otherwise I get a 
>>>> warning about density at the box edges and convergence is even slower.
>>>>
>>>> Are those setting fine, if I simply want to repeat a Gaussian SP job 
>>>> for testing ? Have I picked the DFT functional correctly ? How about the HF 
>>>> part ? Can you tell me in short what exactly is this MIXING and when to use 
>>>> it ?
>>>>
>>>> CP2K performed quite a few times slower than Gaussian (about 10x). I 
>>>> don't want to state the exact timings (I checked with the command `time'), 
>>>> because Gaussian License prohibits publishing of timing information.
>>>> Without the &HF section the performance increases 2x to 3x, but I guess 
>>>> that is for the lack of HF Exchange, which simply makes m062x wrong. The 
>>>> Energy without HF Ex is considerably higher. Wither way Gaussian gives a 
>>>> much lower result for the total Energy. What is going on and am I doing it 
>>>> the right way ?
>>>>
>>>> I understand CP2K has its strengths and in no way I want to speak 
>>>> against it, I just want to learn how to use it and before I get into 
>>>> PERIODIC systems, surface interactions / reactions, solvents and molecular 
>>>> crystals (where I bet CP2K is much better than Gaussian) I want to learn 
>>>> the basics and repeat the kind of calculations I am used to.
>>>>
>>>> Any comment can be of help. Anything to get to a well done calculation 
>>>> and with an increased performance, without sacrificing accuracy too much.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards,
>>>> Dobromir
>>>>
>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cp2k" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cp2k+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cp2k/877d76da-26b5-44a5-a901-7581e49b6fc2n%40googlegroups.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cp2k.org/archives/cp2k-user/attachments/20221220/e428d039/attachment.htm>