A comparison of the two calculations shows that TorsionDrive and serial scanning produce markedly different potential surfaces, with TorsionDrive giving a superior result in terms of finding much lower energy conformations. The serial scan succeeded in locating the leftmost minimum near the start point of scan (-30,0) but failed to obtain the other two local minima found by TorsionDrive. Moreover, the serial scan always yielded equal or higher energy than TorsionDrive at each grid point, and reached many structures in excess of 40 kcal/mol on serial scan, as the serial scan crashed at the (180,0) grid point when the opposite ordering was used, likely due to reaching an excessively strained structure.