ISYM=0 vs ISYM=2 for CPU efficiency
Posted: Wed Jun 08, 2011 10:05 pm
Dear All,
I am studying a system which has no symmetry. Nevertheless, simply by curiosity I wanted to check the impact of the ISYM tag on the computational time. I have run the same calculation, once with ISYM=0 and once with ISYM=2.
Here is the outcome:
ISYM=0
=======
Total CPU time used (sec): 334510.688
User time (sec): 329592.986
System time (sec): 4917.711
Elapsed time (sec): 388932.160
E0= 840.18495 eV
ISYM = 2
========
Total CPU time used (sec): 389981.406
User time (sec): 384049.926
System time (sec): 5931.483
Elapsed time (sec): 807039.157
E0= -840.18517 eV
By default I have not expected any significant difference between the computational time of the 2 runs. Nevertheless, there is a significant slow down of the computational time when the ISYM=2 for a non-symmetric system. Why is this so ?
Looking into the OSZICAR, the number of the ionic relaxation steps is the same (37 in both cases) and also the total energies (given above). Why does the ISYM=2 presence in the INCAR slow down the electronic relaxation ? Notice also the large elapsed time for the ISYM=2 calculation. What is the explanation ?
Ed
I am studying a system which has no symmetry. Nevertheless, simply by curiosity I wanted to check the impact of the ISYM tag on the computational time. I have run the same calculation, once with ISYM=0 and once with ISYM=2.
Here is the outcome:
ISYM=0
=======
Total CPU time used (sec): 334510.688
User time (sec): 329592.986
System time (sec): 4917.711
Elapsed time (sec): 388932.160
E0= 840.18495 eV
ISYM = 2
========
Total CPU time used (sec): 389981.406
User time (sec): 384049.926
System time (sec): 5931.483
Elapsed time (sec): 807039.157
E0= -840.18517 eV
By default I have not expected any significant difference between the computational time of the 2 runs. Nevertheless, there is a significant slow down of the computational time when the ISYM=2 for a non-symmetric system. Why is this so ?
Looking into the OSZICAR, the number of the ionic relaxation steps is the same (37 in both cases) and also the total energies (given above). Why does the ISYM=2 presence in the INCAR slow down the electronic relaxation ? Notice also the large elapsed time for the ISYM=2 calculation. What is the explanation ?
Ed