NOAA

Geophysical Fluid
Dynamics Laboratory

Skip to: [content] [navigation]
search gfdl:

If you are using Navigator 4.x or Internet Explorer 4.x, this site will not render correctly!

Back to faq


[NOAA bullet] Which model is better: CM2.0 or CM2.1?

At GFDL, the CM2.1 model is considered to be our current "workhorse" model, in that it is the one GFDL scientists plan to use to do the bulk of their deccen research over the next couple years. That is not to say that CM2.1 produces a simulation that is superior to CM2.0 in all aspects. In very broad terms, CM2.1's simulation of the mid and high latitudes (atmosphere and ocean) improved when we moved from CM2.0 to CM2.1. However, the simulation of ENSO and low latitude variability is generally better in CM2.0.

So, in response to questions such as "which of the 2 GFDL CM2.x models should I analyze", our typical response is to strongly suggest that you look at the output from both of the models, and do not simply assume that the more recent CM2.1 model is the better of the two for your particular research interests.

The CM2.0 model had a several month headstart on the more recently developed CM2.1 model, and so initially, experimental results from CM2.0 were available for analysis before CM2.1 experimental results. However, by spring of 2005 the availability of model output from the CM2.0 and CM2.1 suites of IPCC-related experiments is nearly identical.

Questions related to the GFDL CM2.x models may be directed to…


[email GFDL.Climate.Model.Info at noaa dot gov] 
last modified: November 13 2012.