Re: NONMEM memory vs. run time

Leonid, Darin, Here are some experimental results rather than theoretical predictions. I ran a problem (ADVAN6) with two 'sizes' of NONMEM created with NMQUAL using Wings for NONMEM. The 'std' size is the default NONMEM configuration. The '570' size is close to the 'big' version provided with NMQUAL. I ran the problems with an Intel core duo processor with 1 Gb RAM compiled with Intel Fortran version 10.1024. I used NONMEM VI 2.0 installed with NMQUAL-6.3.2 and Windows XP. I tried each size of problem two times. Run times exclude NM-TRAN and the compile/link step. You will see that the bigger NONMEM size took 5% longer to complete. There were no page faults visible with the Task Manager using either size. std =Mem Usage 51.1 M byte VM Size 97.1 Mbyte Runtimes: 80.88 sec/ 81.82 sec 570=Mem Usage 199.8 M byte VM Size 1107.9 Mbyte Runtimes: 84.10 sec/ 87.22 sec These results are similar to those I have observed before. The bigger versions of NONMEM run more slowly. This is why I prefer to match the NONMEM size to the problem size. For smaller problems (fewer parameter, fewer obs/subject) I use the std size. For bigger problems WFN allows a choice to increase either parameters, obs/subject or both. Nick Darin Perusich wrote: > The increase in memory consumption doesn't impact runtime positively or negatively, unless of course your system doesn't have enough physical memory to accommodate the increase. NONMEM's memory footprint is directly related to the buffer values in the SIZES file, as you increase the values the memory footprint increases to accommodate. > > In the end processor speed is really the only thing that positively or negatively effects NONMEM runtime. > > Leonid Gibiansky wrote: > > > Dear All, > > I noticed that the Nonmem installed with NMQUAL "big nm6" defaults > > instead of the standard ones results in approximately 10-times increase > > in the memory required to run Nonmem (on my recent problem, from 12 MB > > to 140 MB). I am wondering whether anybody checked how this influences > > the run time. Is it better (in terms of the run time) to use standard > > sizes, or "big" is OK if you have enough RAM? > > Thanks! > > Leonid -- Nick Holford, Dept Pharmacology & Clinical Pharmacology University of Auckland, 85 Park Rd, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel:+64(9)923-6730 fax:+64(9)373-7090 http://www.fmhs.auckland.ac.nz/sms/pharmacology/holford