Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Ana Sayfaya Dön

I implemented Google Research's TurboQuant as a CUDA-native compression engine on Blackwell B200. 5x KV cache compression on Qwen 2.5-1.5B, near-loseless attention scores, generating live from compressed memory. 5 custom cuTile CUDA kernels ft: - fused attention (with QJL corrections) - online softmax -on-chip cache decompression - pipelined TMA...

anirudhbv_ce's profile picture

ani

7,508 subscribers

813,740 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Bilim & Teknoloji
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

66 Yorum

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

The numbers: - 5.02x compression (3 bits/coordinate) ~0.985 cosine similarity vs FP16 attention (layers 7–27) - 144.7 tok/s on B200 - Fused attention kernel beats FP16 matmul at 4K+ sequence length Random rotation spreads outliers into a uniform bell curve → Lloyd-Max quantization bins where data is dense → QJL corrects the bias with 1-bit signs so attention scores come out lossless. The value cache gets 3-bit MSE, keys get 2-bit MSE + 1-bit QJL correction.

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

Started here, last week. Ended with ~2,000 lines of cuTile. Started with pseudocode and basic kernels. Profiled and iterated to optimize them. Shaved 6% compute time with fused V cache decompression and GPU memory swizzling.

Marc A. Munoz profil fotoğrafı
Marc A. Munoz5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch I’m so happy I’m on this side of twitter

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch :)

sensho profil fotoğrafı
sensho5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch did u start this from just writing it out by hand? holy

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch was j putting thoughts done on how a basic version should work lol

AiDevCraft profil fotoğrafı
AiDevCraft5 ay önce

5x KV cache compression with near-lossless attention scores is the kind of result that directly translates to longer context windows at the same memory budget. The B200's TMA hardware making this practical on-chip is what separates it from software-only approaches that eat into throughput.

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Couldn't have said it better. The newer chips can handle larger throughput- that's how they're designed. It's just a matter of recognizing it and adjusting your kernels accordingly.

Sriram Krishnan profil fotoğrafı
Sriram Krishnan5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Very cool

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Thanks for checking my project out Sriram!

CV.YH profil fotoğrafı
CV.YH5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch I did that

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Cool stuff!!!

Abhishek Ekaanth profil fotoğrafı
Abhishek Ekaanth5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch I did the same implementation on one of my projects, TQ makes it scalable for edge device LLMs

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@humblefool @GoogleResearch Cool project!!!

Abhishek Ekaanth profil fotoğrafı
Abhishek Ekaanth5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Thanks

Hubert Thieblot profil fotoğrafı
Hubert Thieblot5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Cracked

Gavin profil fotoğrafı
Gavin5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Great work! Sent you a dm

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 👋😁

E.H.X.Z.E.L profil fotoğrafı
E.H.X.Z.E.L5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch This is impressive bro, I had to feed the papers into Notebook LM to understand what was going on. I'm relatively new into AI research and Model engineering, and seeing the speed at which you implemented this is mind blowing and a huge inspiration. Let's connect 🖖💪

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@N_Ehxzel7 @GoogleResearch Yeah the paper was a lot to take in. I spent an entire day breaking down the math, tryna put the ideas together. Once things clicked, I put my ideas down on paper and began the kernels :)

E.H.X.Z.E.L profil fotoğrafı
E.H.X.Z.E.L5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Now that's some Tony Stark type shii Bro 🤣🤣🤣 Impressive.

NOIR_BD profil fotoğrafı
NOIR_BD5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch My implementation on an A10 got me till here (I did 4 bit tho)

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch That's sick wtf Send your implementation!

surya profil fotoğrafı
surya5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch This is sick

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🙏 following in your footsteps

John D. Pope 🦒 profil fotoğrafı
John D. Pope 🦒5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Can you 10x compression ?

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Worth taking a look 👀

John D. Pope 🦒 profil fotoğrafı
John D. Pope 🦒5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch I didn’t get it to compile to 4 bit - Claude got stuck in a loop - but 3bit results looked stellar - johndpope/llama-cpp-turboquant branch feature/planarquant-kv-cache, commit 20efe75 -

Kenny Guo profil fotoğrafı
Kenny Guo5 ay önce

Insane work!!!

InternationalOptions profil fotoğrafı
InternationalOptions5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Anirudh, how many offers by how to join AI labs and start ups? :-) I’d wager >10!!

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch LOL 🙏

vivek varikuti profil fotoğrafı
vivek varikuti5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch I implemented this from scratch on H100. Got 44-59% KV-cache reduction with exact prefill fidelity across 5 model families. Full benchmarks in my thread i found something that no one noticed

Ashwin Gopinath profil fotoğrafı
Ashwin Gopinath5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Thank for implementation! It helped us as we figured out how to beat @googleresearch’s provably near-optimal 5.02× compression ratio :-)

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🙏 this is so cool!!!

Navjot Singh profil fotoğrafı
Navjot Singh5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch yo are you at shopify right now ?

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Bro we literally went to the Sidekick team burst dinner together last month LOL Tall guy, intern who was from Turner lmao

Navjot Singh profil fotoğrafı
Navjot Singh5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch yes i just remembered. check slack

Nengjia Li profil fotoğrafı
Nengjia Li5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🦫bv ce

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🫡 you alr know

Ilyas profil fotoğrafı
Ilyas5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch impressive work ! but i noticed in your video that the cosine similarity is not 0.9 across the board as declared, seems to be very low on some layers and some weights especially the first layers where it dips to 0.29 the max absolute weight error of 1 is also concerning

b/acc, context platform engineer profil fotoğrafı
b/acc, context platform engineer5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Absolute 🔥 Anirudh Combining this with Dynamo KVBM and 1000x memory capacity will unlock enormous agent swarm scale and efficiency 💪

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🙏 he knows

Eshan profil fotoğrafı
Eshan5 ay önce

5x KV cache compression with near-lossless attention scores means you're fitting roughly 5x the context into the same GPU memory without degrading output quality. for anyone not tracking this, the practical implication is that models that currently need 8 GPUs to serve could potentially run on 2. the cost reduction isn't incremental, it's structural. this is the kind of work that changes who can afford to run large models

Yashvardhan Verma profil fotoğrafı
Yashvardhan Verma5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch gonna try this, seems awesome

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch It is! I'm looking for feedback and ways to improve. Pls try and lmk 👍

ruslan profil fotoğrafı
ruslan5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch this is so fire

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🙏

levi profil fotoğrafı
levi5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch so sick!! you're killing it man

Utkarsh profil fotoğrafı
Utkarsh5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Yoo solid work. How does the chip cache decompression work?

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

Great question :) Instead of decompressing in a separate kernel, we do it inside the attention loop, right before they hit the Tensor Cores. This pushes our kernel more into compute-bound instead of memory-bound. A couple of things: 1.) I load the Pi (rotation matrix) beforehand. It's constant across all streamed KV blocks. 2.) For every value block, I use the indices and norms for Llyod-Max centroid lookup. 3.) Then, I unrotate k_mse (centroid-based coords) and multiply with the norm to turn it back into the full 128 dimension vector (not normalized anymore). Because we reconstructed V, I just accumulate it to finish our attention score. FP16 decompressed values never touch HBM.

Pakhandi billa profil fotoğrafı
Pakhandi billa5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch @MeetSiddhapura

adi profil fotoğrafı
adi5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch super cool anirudh

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Thanks big bro 🙏

chi profil fotoğrafı
chi5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch insanely cool work

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Thanks! 🙏

Armaan Sidhu profil fotoğrafı
Armaan Sidhu5 ay önce

A Waterloo undergrad just built the first working implementation of Google's most disruptive AI paper. In one week. Memory stocks crashed. Investors got it exactly backwards. TurboQuant compresses the KV cache — the part of an AI model that eats your GPU memory during long conversations — from 16 bits down to 3 bits per value. 5x compression. Near-zero quality loss. No retraining needed. Drop it into any existing model and it just works. Micron, SK Hynix, Samsung, SanDisk all dumped 3-6% in a single day. Wall Street's logic: if AI needs less memory, sell memory stocks. That logic has been wrong every single time in the history of computing. This is Jevons paradox — the 160-year-old principle that says when you make a resource more efficient, you don't use less of it. You use more. Coal engines got efficient, coal consumption exploded. Bandwidth got cheaper, data consumption went vertical. Storage got dense, we filled it with 4K video. Every time. Here's what TurboQuant actually does to demand. A 70B parameter model that used to need a $10,000 workstation to run at long context? Now runs on a $1,500 consumer GPU. A model that choked at 32K tokens? Now handles 100K+. A smartphone that could barely run a 3B toy model? Now runs 7-13B with thousands of tokens of usable context. You didn't reduce demand. You just made AI accessible to a billion more devices. Every one of those devices now needs memory. Every user who couldn't run local AI before now can — and will. And every developer who hits the new ceiling will immediately ask for more. Anirudh BV — a student at UWaterloo — took Google's paper, wrote 2,000 lines of CUDA, and had it running on Nvidia's Blackwell B200 within a week. From pseudocode to live generation from compressed memory. If a college kid can ship this before most corporate labs, the adoption curve isn't years out. It's already here. The investors who sold memory stocks on this news will be buying them back within two quarters. Efficiency doesn't kill demand. It creates the demand that didn't exist yet.

Parsa Ahmadnezhad profil fotoğrafı
Parsa Ahmadnezhad5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch @nvidia

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch @nvidia Appreciate the lob parsaxa

Satvik Garimella profil fotoğrafı
Satvik Garimella5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Fire asf g🔥

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch thanks big bro :)

Eyada profil fotoğrafı
Eyada5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Implementing a cutting-edge paper like TurboQuant end-to-end on new hardware (Blackwell) is the real test of a system's potential. Moving from theory to live generation is impressive.

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch I appreciate it! Had lots of fun picking this one out

luthira profil fotoğrafı
luthira5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 😼🤘

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch 🙏 the one and only

Udula Abeykoon profil fotoğrafı
Udula Abeykoon5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch solved the turboquant problem

ani profil fotoğrafı
ani5 ay önce

@GoogleResearch Had to solve it bc @nengjiali already solved the drift problem and you solved the seo problem. Seo and drift are old news.

Benzer Videolar

I trained a 12M parameter LLM on my own ML framework using a Rust backend and CUDA kernels for flash attention, AdamW, and more. Wrote the full transformer architecture, and BPE tokenizer from scratch. The framework features: - Custom CUDA kernels (Flash Attention, fused LayerNorm, fused GELU) for 3x increased throughput - Automatic WebGPU fallback for non-NVIDIA devices - TypeScript API with Rust compute backend - One npm install to get started, prebuilt binaries for every platform Try out the model for yourself: Built with Reese Chong. Check out the repos and blog if you want to learn more. Shoutout to Modal for the compute credits allowing me to train on 2 A100 GPUs without going broke cc sunny madra Gavin
2:12

I trained a 12M parameter LLM on my own ML framework using a Rust backend and CUDA kernels for flash attention, AdamW, and more. Wrote the full transformer architecture, and BPE tokenizer from scratch. The framework features: - Custom CUDA kernels (Flash Attention, fused LayerNorm, fused GELU) for 3x increased throughput - Automatic WebGPU fallback for non-NVIDIA devices - TypeScript API with Rust compute backend - One npm install to get started, prebuilt binaries for every platform Try out the model for yourself: Built with Reese Chong. Check out the repos and blog if you want to learn more. Shoutout to Modal for the compute credits allowing me to train on 2 A100 GPUs without going broke cc sunny madra Gavin

Aadi Kulshrestha

820,861 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

I added KV caching and INT8 KV quantization to our transformer inference, improving throughput by 35x. All of this was done from scratch in Rust + CUDA, on top of a homemade ML framework. On a 4-token prompt with 252 generated tokens: - Original: 0.76 tok/s - KV cache fp32: 27.21 tok/s - KV cache int8 (quantized): 27.29 tok/s Try it out yourself here: In practice: - KV caching gave us about a 35x end-to-end speedup - INT8 KV cache kept roughly the same speed as fp32 but cut KV cache memory by 3.78x FP32 cache used 4.5 MB in this run while the INT8 cache used only 1.19 MB This simple change to inference created a huge impact on performance. To learn more about the KV cache and other optimizations like this, check out the blog at
2:36

I added KV caching and INT8 KV quantization to our transformer inference, improving throughput by 35x. All of this was done from scratch in Rust + CUDA, on top of a homemade ML framework. On a 4-token prompt with 252 generated tokens: - Original: 0.76 tok/s - KV cache fp32: 27.21 tok/s - KV cache int8 (quantized): 27.29 tok/s Try it out yourself here: In practice: - KV caching gave us about a 35x end-to-end speedup - INT8 KV cache kept roughly the same speed as fp32 but cut KV cache memory by 3.78x FP32 cache used 4.5 MB in this run while the INT8 cache used only 1.19 MB This simple change to inference created a huge impact on performance. To learn more about the KV cache and other optimizations like this, check out the blog at

Reese Chong

53,026 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

A tricky LLM interview question: You're serving a reasoning model on vLLM, and it keeps running out of GPU memory on long traces. So you add KV cache compression and evict 90% of the cached tokens. VRAM usage stays as is and GPU still runs out of memory. Why? (answer below) Evicting 90% of the KV cache can free almost none of the memory it was using. This sounds counterintuitive, but it follows directly from how production servers store the cache today. The KV cache grows with every token a model generates. Each token appends its key and value vectors across every layer, and nothing is freed while generation continues. This is the dominant memory cost for reasoning models. If a 32K-token CoT caches ~32K tokens of KV vectors, a Qwen3-32B with 4-bit weights will run out-of-memory around 24K tokens on a 24GB GPU. One obvious solution is to keep the important tokens and drop the rest, since attention is sparse enough to allow it. But this does not solve the memory problem yet. The reason is paged attention, which is the memory manager behind vLLM and most production servers. Under the hood, it splits GPU memory into fixed physical blocks, each one holds the KV for about 16 tokens. This block returns to the allocator only when every slot inside it is empty. Since the eviction logic selects tokens by importance, and such tokens are scattered across blocks... ...so despite eviction, almost every block is left with at least some survivor tokens. For instance, if the logic evicts 14k of 16k tokens across 1,000 blocks, most likely every block will still have a token. This means the allocator frees almost nothing. Placing the new tokens into those freed slots is not ideal because it breaks the cache's layout. Say token 16,001 arrives, and it's placed in the slot the 40th token used to hold. The cache now reads position 38, then 16,001, then 41, so the cache is no longer in token order. Attention can still compute the right answer from that, but only if every slot now carries a separate note recording which position it actually holds. This introduces another bookkeeping cost that an in-order layout inherently avoids. So the cache is logically 90% smaller and still physically the same size. Many compression results miss this because they measure on pre-allocated contiguous tensors rather than a paged server. There's another problem. Eviction methods pick which tokens to keep by looking at the attention scores themselves (as expected). But fast attention kernels used in production, like FlashAttention, never save those scores. They compute attention in small pieces and throw the full score grid away as they go, which is also why they're fast. So the exact signal eviction methods need isn't available in memory. The workaround is to fall back to eager attention and build the full matrix, which gives up the speed FlashAttention was there to provide. NVIDIA published a method called TriAttention to solve both these problems. It never needs attention scores. Instead, it scores tokens from the geometry of the model's key and query vectors before RoPE is applied, where those vectors sit in stable clusters. For the memory problem, it runs a compaction pass every 128 decoded tokens. The surviving tokens slide forward to close the holes eviction creates, so whole blocks empty out and return to the allocator while the cache stays in token order. On long reasoning traces, the approach matches full-attention accuracy while decoding 2.5x faster and using 10.7x less KV memory. KV cache compression is a big infrastructure problem. The number that decides whether it works is the count of freed blocks, not the count of evicted tokens. You can find the NVIDIA write-up here: I wrote a first-principles breakdown of how the KV cache works. It walks through why the model stores keys and values at all, why the cache grows with every token, and a comparison of LLM generation speed with and without KV caching. Read it below.
0:23

A tricky LLM interview question: You're serving a reasoning model on vLLM, and it keeps running out of GPU memory on long traces. So you add KV cache compression and evict 90% of the cached tokens. VRAM usage stays as is and GPU still runs out of memory. Why? (answer below) Evicting 90% of the KV cache can free almost none of the memory it was using. This sounds counterintuitive, but it follows directly from how production servers store the cache today. The KV cache grows with every token a model generates. Each token appends its key and value vectors across every layer, and nothing is freed while generation continues. This is the dominant memory cost for reasoning models. If a 32K-token CoT caches ~32K tokens of KV vectors, a Qwen3-32B with 4-bit weights will run out-of-memory around 24K tokens on a 24GB GPU. One obvious solution is to keep the important tokens and drop the rest, since attention is sparse enough to allow it. But this does not solve the memory problem yet. The reason is paged attention, which is the memory manager behind vLLM and most production servers. Under the hood, it splits GPU memory into fixed physical blocks, each one holds the KV for about 16 tokens. This block returns to the allocator only when every slot inside it is empty. Since the eviction logic selects tokens by importance, and such tokens are scattered across blocks... ...so despite eviction, almost every block is left with at least some survivor tokens. For instance, if the logic evicts 14k of 16k tokens across 1,000 blocks, most likely every block will still have a token. This means the allocator frees almost nothing. Placing the new tokens into those freed slots is not ideal because it breaks the cache's layout. Say token 16,001 arrives, and it's placed in the slot the 40th token used to hold. The cache now reads position 38, then 16,001, then 41, so the cache is no longer in token order. Attention can still compute the right answer from that, but only if every slot now carries a separate note recording which position it actually holds. This introduces another bookkeeping cost that an in-order layout inherently avoids. So the cache is logically 90% smaller and still physically the same size. Many compression results miss this because they measure on pre-allocated contiguous tensors rather than a paged server. There's another problem. Eviction methods pick which tokens to keep by looking at the attention scores themselves (as expected). But fast attention kernels used in production, like FlashAttention, never save those scores. They compute attention in small pieces and throw the full score grid away as they go, which is also why they're fast. So the exact signal eviction methods need isn't available in memory. The workaround is to fall back to eager attention and build the full matrix, which gives up the speed FlashAttention was there to provide. NVIDIA published a method called TriAttention to solve both these problems. It never needs attention scores. Instead, it scores tokens from the geometry of the model's key and query vectors before RoPE is applied, where those vectors sit in stable clusters. For the memory problem, it runs a compaction pass every 128 decoded tokens. The surviving tokens slide forward to close the holes eviction creates, so whole blocks empty out and return to the allocator while the cache stays in token order. On long reasoning traces, the approach matches full-attention accuracy while decoding 2.5x faster and using 10.7x less KV memory. KV cache compression is a big infrastructure problem. The number that decides whether it works is the count of freed blocks, not the count of evicted tokens. You can find the NVIDIA write-up here: I wrote a first-principles breakdown of how the KV cache works. It walks through why the model stores keys and values at all, why the cache grows with every token, and a comparison of LLM generation speed with and without KV caching. Read it below.

Avi Chawla

271,839 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Google's Gemma 4 26B A4B QAT hits 25+ tokens/sec and 320+ tokens/sec prefill on 8 GB VRAM (RTX 4060) + 16 GB RAM using TurboQuant Prefill just went from 200 → 320+ tok/s on the same 8GB card. 1.6x, no new hardware, no new quant, just a KV cache trick stacked on top of the Gemma 4 26B MoE setup from a few days ago. A few days ago I posted Gemma 4 26B A4B hitting 28 tok/s decode on 8GB VRAM using native MTP. prefill was stuck around 200 tok/s. fair callout by the community. So today I tested something I'd already been meaning to try: TheTom/llama-cpp-turboquant, the TurboQuant KV cache fork by Tom Turney (Tom Turney). (github link in the comments) thanks to him, the fork just got resynced to mainline, so MTP + TurboQuant now run together cleanly (I didnt see any meaningful gains by using MTP with this setup though but you can try). The flags (No MTP): -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -cnv -c 64000 --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 Results on the same RTX 4060 8GB, tested with a 27k token prompt at 64k context loaded: Prefill: 200 tok/s → 320+ tok/s Decode: stayed above 25 tok/s (without MTP) Why it works: TurboQuant uses walsh hadamard rotation + polar quantization on the KV cache. keys are sensitive to compression, values aren't much, so it splits the difference: K stays at q8_0, V drops to turbo3 (~3 bits). bonus from the memory savings: same 8GB card can now stretch to 100-120k context with minimal decode penalty. It should now be snappier with any agent harness such as hermes agent without compromise on intelligence. If you're already running Gemma 4 on a small card, this stacks on top for free. Try --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 on your setup and report back what your prefill/decode split looks like. unsloth model gguf and llama.cpp turboquant fork links in the comments. what's your prefill number before vs after?
0:31

Google's Gemma 4 26B A4B QAT hits 25+ tokens/sec and 320+ tokens/sec prefill on 8 GB VRAM (RTX 4060) + 16 GB RAM using TurboQuant Prefill just went from 200 → 320+ tok/s on the same 8GB card. 1.6x, no new hardware, no new quant, just a KV cache trick stacked on top of the Gemma 4 26B MoE setup from a few days ago. A few days ago I posted Gemma 4 26B A4B hitting 28 tok/s decode on 8GB VRAM using native MTP. prefill was stuck around 200 tok/s. fair callout by the community. So today I tested something I'd already been meaning to try: TheTom/llama-cpp-turboquant, the TurboQuant KV cache fork by Tom Turney (Tom Turney). (github link in the comments) thanks to him, the fork just got resynced to mainline, so MTP + TurboQuant now run together cleanly (I didnt see any meaningful gains by using MTP with this setup though but you can try). The flags (No MTP): -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -cnv -c 64000 --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 Results on the same RTX 4060 8GB, tested with a 27k token prompt at 64k context loaded: Prefill: 200 tok/s → 320+ tok/s Decode: stayed above 25 tok/s (without MTP) Why it works: TurboQuant uses walsh hadamard rotation + polar quantization on the KV cache. keys are sensitive to compression, values aren't much, so it splits the difference: K stays at q8_0, V drops to turbo3 (~3 bits). bonus from the memory savings: same 8GB card can now stretch to 100-120k context with minimal decode penalty. It should now be snappier with any agent harness such as hermes agent without compromise on intelligence. If you're already running Gemma 4 on a small card, this stacks on top for free. Try --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v turbo3 on your setup and report back what your prefill/decode split looks like. unsloth model gguf and llama.cpp turboquant fork links in the comments. what's your prefill number before vs after?

Alok

119,821 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

🎉 Congrats to MiniMax (official) on releasing MiniMax M3! Frontier coding and agentic capabilities, native image and video input, computer use, and a 1M-token context window, all in a single open model. At the heart of M3 is MSA, a new sparse attention architecture: instead of attending densely over the full KV cache, each query scores 128-token KV blocks and runs attention only over the top blocks. That is what makes 1M-token context practical to serve. M3 runs in vLLM with day-0 support, verified on NVIDIA and AMD hardware: ✨ MSA sparse attention with dedicated prefill and decode kernels ✨ 1M-token context serving with prefix caching and chunked prefill ✨ BF16 and MXFP8 checkpoints, with MoE backends for both Hopper and Blackwell ✨ Native multimodal input (image + video) ✨ Tool calling, reasoning parsing, and thinking-mode control for agent workloads Day-0 support like this is a true team effort. Grateful to the teams at MiniMax (official), NVIDIA AI, AI at AMD, and Inferact, and to the vLLM community for making it happen. 🙏 Deep dive into the implementation, kernel work, and deployment recipes: 🔗
0:21

🎉 Congrats to MiniMax (official) on releasing MiniMax M3! Frontier coding and agentic capabilities, native image and video input, computer use, and a 1M-token context window, all in a single open model. At the heart of M3 is MSA, a new sparse attention architecture: instead of attending densely over the full KV cache, each query scores 128-token KV blocks and runs attention only over the top blocks. That is what makes 1M-token context practical to serve. M3 runs in vLLM with day-0 support, verified on NVIDIA and AMD hardware: ✨ MSA sparse attention with dedicated prefill and decode kernels ✨ 1M-token context serving with prefix caching and chunked prefill ✨ BF16 and MXFP8 checkpoints, with MoE backends for both Hopper and Blackwell ✨ Native multimodal input (image + video) ✨ Tool calling, reasoning parsing, and thinking-mode control for agent workloads Day-0 support like this is a true team effort. Grateful to the teams at MiniMax (official), NVIDIA AI, AI at AMD, and Inferact, and to the vLLM community for making it happen. 🙏 Deep dive into the implementation, kernel work, and deployment recipes: 🔗

vLLM

40,306 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

$NVDA $MU $SNDK $LITE PAPER OVERVIEW AND CORE CLAIMS The paper “KV Cache Transform Coding for Compact Storage in LLM Inference” introduces kvtc, a transform-coding pipeline that compresses transformer key-value (KV) caches primarily for storage and transfer in LLM serving, rather than for accelerating the per-token attention kernel during active decoding. The method combines 3 stages: (1) feature decorrelation via a PCA basis computed from a calibration dataset and reused across requests; (2) adaptive, variable-precision quantization with bit allocation solved via dynamic programming (DP), including groupwise scaling/shift overhead; and (3) lossless entropy coding (DEFLATE via nvCOMP in the reference implementation) to exploit residual redundancy after quantization. The central empirical claim is that KV tensors contain large, exploitable redundancy across heads and layers, enabling approximately 20× compression versus a 16-bit baseline with negligible degradation across a broad set of accuracy and long-context benchmarks, with materially higher compression (≥40×) available at modest quality cost in some regimes. The system claim is that such compression materially improves the economics of multi-turn, prefix-reuse serving by extending effective KV cache capacity in GPU HBM and host tiers (DRAM/NVMe) and by reducing inter-node and GPU↔host bandwidth demands, thereby improving cache hit rates and reducing time-to-first-token (TTFT) relative to recomputation when caches would otherwise be evicted. KV CACHE AS THE DOMINANT STATE VARIABLE IN INFERENCE ECONOMICS KV cache growth is linear in context length and is multiplicative in layers and attention heads, making it an increasingly dominant constraint as (a) context lengths expand, (b) models add layers and maintain large hidden dimensions, and (c) production workloads shift toward iterative and tool-augmented interactions that repeatedly reuse long prefixes. The paper uses the canonical 16-bit KV cache size formula (4·l·h·d_head·t) bytes and reports 16-bit KV cache sizes per 1K tokens of context that are already operationally large: 128MiB for Llama 3.1 8B, 160MiB for Mistral NeMo 12B, and 320MiB for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct. In binary units, these figures imply per-token KV footprints of 128KiB/token (Llama 3.1 8B), 160KiB/token (Mistral NeMo 12B), and 320KiB/token (Llama 3.3 70B Instruct) at 16-bit. For a 10K-token prompt (10×1K in the paper’s binary convention), the 16-bit KV cache sizes scale to approximately 1.25GiB (Llama 3.1 8B), 1.56GiB (Mistral NeMo 12B), and 3.13GiB (Llama 3.3 70B Instruct). These magnitudes explain why stale caches create a throughput–latency dilemma: retaining them in HBM maximizes responsiveness on future turns but crowds out concurrent sessions; evicting them forces quadratic-cost prefill recomputation and increases TTFT; offloading them to host or storage introduces large transfer overhead and consumes DRAM/NVMe capacity. A key operational nuance emphasized is that modern serving stacks increasingly treat KV caches as a database, leveraging block paging and shared-prefix reuse. In the common disaggregated serving design (separate prefill and decode nodes), KV cache transfer becomes a dominant category of cross-node traffic. Under that design, any reduction in KV cache size directly increases effective fabric capacity and reduces tail latency attributable to congestion, while also enabling longer cache lifetimes in “hot” (HBM) and “warm” (CPU DRAM) tiers that raise cache hit rates and reduce recomputation frequency. The paper’s quantitative example illustrates the economic stakes: a 1,000-line code file tokenized at ~10 tokens/line yields ~10K tokens; for Llama 3.3 70B, an 8-bit KV cache for that context is ~1.6GiB. Reuse across subsequent turns or parallel chats around the same file is valuable, but HBM scarcity makes retaining many such caches infeasible without compression. TECHNICAL MECHANISM: WHY KV CACHES ARE COMPRESSIBLE AND HOW KVTC EXPLOITS IT The technical rationale begins with an empirical observation: keys (and, to a lesser extent, values) across different attention heads can be aligned into a shared latent space using orthogonal transformations (Procrustes alignment). This supports the hypothesis that head-specific projections introduce rotations of a common subspace rather than completely distinct information, implying that concatenating across heads and layers should reveal low-rank structure suitable for linear decorrelation and dimensionality reduction. The method operationalizes this using a PCA/SVD basis learned from calibration data rather than recomputing a decomposition per prompt. This design choice targets production viability: per-prompt SVD is computationally expensive and scales poorly with long prompts and frequent cache updates. kvtc is explicitly structured as an offline-calibrated, online-applied codec: Calibration (performed 1 time per model and compression setting for DP allocation) A calibration dataset is forwarded through the model to collect KV caches. Token positions are pooled, and a subset of positions is sampled. Keys and values are processed separately. Several implementation choices are highlighted as decisive for stability: Rotary positional embeddings are effectively removed prior to compression (“undo positional rotations”), because positional rotations degrade the apparent low-rank structure of keys. “Attention sink” tokens (the earliest tokens in the sequence) and a sliding window of most recent tokens are excluded from compression because they disproportionately affect attention patterns and are empirically more sensitive to reconstruction error. Cross-layer concatenation is used: keys (or values) from multiple layers and heads at the same token position are concatenated along the feature axis to form a higher-dimensional feature vector. PCA is computed over these concatenated vectors, improving robustness relative to per-layer or per-head PCA. The PCA basis is computed via SVD of centered calibration data, using randomized SVD for scalability with a target rank cutoff. The paper reports calibration regimes of 160K tokens for several models with a 10K PCA dimension cutoff (8K for Qwen variants with fewer KV heads), selected to fit within a single 80GB H100 memory envelope and complete within minutes. A critical economic detail is that the same PCA basis can be reused across multiple compression ratios; only the DP-derived precision assignment changes per compression target. Compression (applied between inference phases) Compression operates on stored KV cache tensors, not on weights, and does not modify attention computation. The KV cache is projected into the PCA basis, quantized, packed, and then entropy-coded. Compression is positioned as a background or between-phase operation (after decoding, or between prefill and decode), executed on GPU or CPU depending on where the cache currently resides. The design intent is that compression should not sit on the critical per-token decoding path; it is a storage and transport optimization. Decompression (performed prior to reuse) Decompression reverses the entropy coding and quantization and applies the inverse PCA projection. A practical latency optimization is proposed: inverse projection can be performed layer-by-layer using submatrices of the PCA basis, allowing generation to begin before the full cache is reconstructed, reducing TTFT. Quantization and bit allocation are the core differentiators versus simpler PCA truncation. PCA provides ordered components by variance; kvtc uses DP to allocate a global bit budget across PCA coordinates (and across groups of coordinates) to minimize reconstruction error in the decorrelated domain. Groups of subsequent PCA coordinates share 16-bit shift and scale factors (a microscaling-inspired design), and the DP algorithm jointly selects group size and precision type under a bit budget, including the overhead of per-group metadata. DP commonly assigns 0 bits to many trailing PCA components, which both increases compression and provides a mechanism to trim the PCA basis to the subset of components that actually carry payload, reducing compute and storage overhead of the projection matrices in deployment. Lossless entropy coding then exploits the structure induced by quantization. DEFLATE is used in the reference implementation, and the paper emphasizes that the incremental gain from the lossless stage is content-dependent but meaningful, with an average uplift of ~1.23× on top of quantization in the reported regime. An ablation in the appendices indicates that GPU-friendly variants (GDeflate) can achieve nearly identical compression ratios (≤0.1 difference in measured cases), implying that throughput-optimized lossless codecs can likely be substituted without sacrificing meaningful compression. EMPIRICAL RESULTS: ACCURACY, COMPRESSION, AND LATENCY General-purpose 8B–12B dense models The paper evaluates Llama 3.1 8B, MN-Minitron 8B, and Mistral NeMo 12B across math/knowledge (GSM8K, MMLU) and long-context tasks (Qasper, Lost in the Middle, RULER Variable Tracking) under a simulated multi-turn regime where compression/decompression is applied periodically, with a sliding window of recent tokens excluded. A consistent pattern appears: kvtc maintains near-vanilla performance through 16× compression settings, and remains competitive at 32×, with degradation becoming task- and model-dependent at 64×, particularly on long-context retrieval metrics when compression is pushed aggressively. Selected quantitative anchor points from the paper’s standard-error table (all values are reported with the paper’s evaluation setup and token-window exclusions): Llama 3.1 8B Vanilla: GSM8K 56.8, MMLU 60.5, Qasper 40.4, LITM 99.4, RULER-VT 99.8 kvtc16×: GSM8K 56.9, MMLU 60.1, Qasper 40.7, LITM 99.3, RULER-VT 99.1 kvtc32×: GSM8K 57.8, MMLU 60.6, Qasper 39.4, LITM 99.1, RULER-VT 98.9 kvtc64×: GSM8K 57.2, MMLU 60.7, Qasper 37.8, LITM 90.2, RULER-VT 95.9 These results indicate that, for this model, long-context sensitivity emerges at 64× with meaningful drops in LITM and RULER-VT, while math/knowledge scores remain stable, implying a differential sensitivity consistent with key-vector precision being more critical for retrieval-style behavior. Mistral NeMo 12B Vanilla: GSM8K 61.9, MMLU 64.5, Qasper 38.4, LITM 99.5, RULER-VT 99.8 kvtc16×: GSM8K 62.0, MMLU 64.4, Qasper 37.6, LITM 99.8, RULER-VT 99.5 kvtc32×: GSM8K 62.2, MMLU 63.8, Qasper 37.5, LITM 99.6, RULER-VT 98.7 kvtc64×: GSM8K 61.9, MMLU 61.4, Qasper 38.0, LITM 95.3, RULER-VT 98.0 Here, degradation at 64× is visible but materially smaller than the Llama 3.1 8B LITM drop, suggesting model-architecture or training-data differences can change the tolerance envelope for aggressive KV cache distortion. MN-Minitron 8B Vanilla: GSM8K 59.1, MMLU 64.3, Qasper 38.2, LITM 99.8, RULER-VT 99.4 kvtc16×: GSM8K 60.3, MMLU 64.1, Qasper 38.6, LITM 99.3, RULER-VT 98.8 kvtc32×: GSM8K 59.1, MMLU 63.7, Qasper 37.7, LITM 86.9, RULER-VT 96.0 kvtc64×: GSM8K 57.8, MMLU 62.1, Qasper 38.1, LITM 59.5, RULER-VT 93.4 This model shows markedly higher sensitivity on LITM at 32× and 64×, despite stable short-context metrics, reinforcing that “compression safety” is not monotonic in parameter count and that pruning/distillation choices can alter KV cache redundancy or robustness. Comparisons to baselines The paper compares kvtc to quantization baselines (KIVI, GEAR, FP8) and eviction baselines (H2O, TOVA), plus an SVD-based prefill-optimization method (xKV). Across the reported tasks: Low-bit quantization methods at modest compression (2-bit KV schemes) show earlier degradation in long-context behavior than kvtc at substantially higher compression settings. Eviction methods perform poorly as generic compressors for long-context tasks, consistent with their objective function (selective pruning) being misaligned with “lossless-ish storage for reuse.” xKV shows competitive results on some tasks but a consistent underperformance on Qasper relative to kvtc and vanilla in the provided tables, consistent with method-specific distortions introduced by its decomposition regime. Reasoning models and high-variance tasks For DeepSeek-R1-distilled Qwen 2.5 reasoning models, the paper evaluates AIME 2024/2025 and LiveCodeBench coding. Results are averaged over 8 runs with large variance, but a key inference is that kvtc at ~9×–21× compression achieves broadly similar AIME scores within variance bands, while coding performance remains stable at ~9× and degrades more visibly at ~18×–21× on the 7B model. An important nuance is that smaller reasoning models already have smaller KV footprints (reported ~29KiB/token for Qwen R1 1.5B versus 131KiB/token for Llama 3.1 8B), so the economic value of aggressive KV cache compression is proportionally higher for large models and long contexts than for small models with short contexts, unless the serving system’s bottleneck is dominated by cache transfer rather than HBM capacity. Multi-GPU inference and pipeline parallel For Llama 3.3 70B Instruct run pipeline-parallel across 4 GPUs (20 layers per GPU), the paper compresses KV cache chunks independently per GPU. On MATH-500, the reported accuracy declines from 75.6 (vanilla) to 74.4 at 10× and 72.6 at 20×, with standard errors near ~1.9. NIAH and LITM remain at 100.0 for all tested ratios in that table. The paper notes that joint compression across chunks could improve accuracy for some offload scenarios but is not required for feasibility, highlighting an engineering trade-off between deployment simplicity in distributed settings and optimal global compression. Latency and TTFT economics A critical system result is the measured compression/decompression latency on an H100 for a non-fused implementation. For Mistral NeMo 12B in bfloat16: BS=8, CTX=8K: compression 379ms, decompression 267ms; vanilla recompute TTFT 3098ms; kvtc decompression TTFT 380ms BS=2, CTX=16K: compression 194ms, decompression 143ms; vanilla recompute TTFT 1780ms; kvtc decompression TTFT 208ms These measurements imply that, when a cache would otherwise be recomputed, decompressing a stored compressed cache can reduce TTFT by ~8×–9× in these scenarios, even without kernel fusion. The decomposition of runtime shows PCA projection and entropy coding as the largest contributors, implying that GPU-optimized kernels and faster GPU-native lossless codecs could reduce overhead further. The fundamental economic conclusion is that, in multi-turn settings with long prefixes, compression-induced overhead is likely dominated by the avoided prefill compute and avoided transfer overhead for uncompressed caches. KEY DEPLOYMENT-SENSITIVE DESIGN CHOICES AND FAILURE MODES Several design choices appear to be “hard requirements” rather than optional optimizations: Sink tokens and sliding window exclusions The paper’s ablations show that compressing early “sink” tokens can catastrophically degrade accuracy at high compression ratios (example: Llama 3.1 8B at 64× collapses on multiple tasks when sink tokens are compressed). Similarly, compressing the most recent tokens hurts performance, motivating a sliding window (default 128 tokens) that remains uncompressed. This introduces a predictable engineering constraint: kvtc is not a uniform compression of the full cache; it is a policy-driven, token-position-dependent codec. Production integration therefore requires correct handling of token positions, attention sinks, and window management, and these policies must be aligned with attention-kernel behavior and model-specific sink dynamics. RoPE handling Removing positional rotations prior to compression is described as important for preserving low-rank structure. In deployment, this implies that the codec must be position-aware and must invert and reapply RoPE correctly. This is an additional source of complexity relative to pure per-token quantization and is sensitive to model variants and RoPE parameterizations. Calibration set representativeness The method’s quality hinges on the PCA basis generalizing from calibration data to production data. The paper demonstrates relative stability with 160K–200K calibration tokens and explores domain shifts (general web text vs math traces vs code). Results suggest that moderate domain mismatch is tolerated at 16×–64×, while extreme compression (e.g., 256× in ablations) becomes materially more sensitive to calibration choice. In production, this implies that operators targeting the “negligible degradation” regime should be able to calibrate with broadly representative corpora, while operators targeting ultra-high compression for specialized workloads should expect tighter coupling between calibration domain and achieved quality. PCA matrix storage overhead and operational footprint A non-trivial hidden cost is the need to store PCA projection matrices per model. The paper reports that, prior to DP trimming, PCA matrices stored at 16-bit can amount to a meaningful fraction of model parameter count (examples reported: ~2.4% for Llama 3.3 70B, ~8.7% for Llama 3.1 8B). This overhead is amortized across all cached sessions for a model but competes with HBM/DRAM budgets in multi-model serving. DP-driven trimming can reduce this overhead at higher compression ratios by removing zero-bit components, but the directionality is not guaranteed at low compression ratios if many components remain active. In distributed inference (pipeline parallel), per-chunk PCA can reduce matrix sizes, but may reduce cross-layer decorrelation benefits if fewer layers are concatenated. SYSTEM-LEVEL IMPLICATIONS FOR GENERATIVE AI INFRASTRUCTURE GPU AND HBM The principal infrastructure implication is that KV cache compression at storage time targets the dominant memory allocator stressor in stateful serving: the accumulation of idle or warm conversation state. For workloads with long reusable prefixes (code assistants, enterprise agents with large system prompts, repeated RAG scaffolds, document chat), the limiting resource frequently becomes HBM reserved for KV caches rather than compute. By compressing stale caches by ~20× (or more), the same HBM budget can retain a materially larger working set of cached prefixes, increasing cache hit rates and reducing recomputation. This effect is multiplicative with cache-aware routing and prefix sharing: more prefixes can remain resident (hot or warm) and can be routed to nodes that already hold them, improving both throughput and tail latency. However, kvtc as described does not reduce the active KV cache footprint during the actual attention computation for a currently decoding sequence, because the model operates on decompressed KV caches during decoding. Therefore, the method does not directly reduce HBM bandwidth consumed by attention kernels during steady-state decode, and does not directly address the “memory traffic per generated token” bottleneck that motivates online KV quantization and eviction strategies. The primary HBM benefit is increased effective capacity for caches between turns and reduced HBM pressure from storing many idle sessions, not reduced per-token decode bandwidth. Compression and decompression themselves consume GPU compute and memory bandwidth. The measured decompression TTFT of ~208ms–380ms in the provided benchmarks indicates that the overhead is real but can be materially smaller than recomputation of long prefixes. In an HBM-constrained serving environment, this overhead can be interpreted as a trade between (a) maintaining more caches warm and paying decompression on reuse versus (b) evicting caches and paying full prefill recomputation. The decision boundary will depend on distribution of inter-turn idle times, probability of reuse, and SLA sensitivity to TTFT. kvtc expands the feasible region where keeping caches is economically rational, especially for long prompts. CPU AND DRAM The method implies a stronger role for CPU DRAM as a warm KV cache tier. A ~20× compression ratio changes the practical scale of “warm state” that can be stored per server. Using the paper’s reported KV cache sizes, a 10K-token 16-bit KV cache for Llama 3.3 70B is ~3.13GiB; compressing by ~20× would reduce this to ~160MiB. At that size, storing hundreds to thousands of warm conversation states in DRAM becomes materially more feasible, increasing cache hit rates and reducing NVMe dependence. This can shift system design from “HBM-only hot caches with aggressive eviction” toward “HBM hot + DRAM warm with long retention,” which is structurally analogous to CPU page cache hierarchies in classical systems design. CPU compute implications depend on where compression is executed. The paper explicitly allows compression on CPU if the cache is already in storage, but the strongest bandwidth savings are achieved when compression happens before moving KV caches off the GPU. If an operator chooses GPU-side compression prior to PCIe/NVLink transfer, CPU compute overhead is modest (orchestrating and DP calibration offline). If an operator instead transfers uncompressed caches to CPU for compression, bandwidth savings are forfeited and CPU memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck. Therefore, the most economically coherent deployment path is GPU-native compression/decompression with CPU DRAM used as the warm storage reservoir.
12:09

$NVDA $MU $SNDK $LITE PAPER OVERVIEW AND CORE CLAIMS The paper “KV Cache Transform Coding for Compact Storage in LLM Inference” introduces kvtc, a transform-coding pipeline that compresses transformer key-value (KV) caches primarily for storage and transfer in LLM serving, rather than for accelerating the per-token attention kernel during active decoding. The method combines 3 stages: (1) feature decorrelation via a PCA basis computed from a calibration dataset and reused across requests; (2) adaptive, variable-precision quantization with bit allocation solved via dynamic programming (DP), including groupwise scaling/shift overhead; and (3) lossless entropy coding (DEFLATE via nvCOMP in the reference implementation) to exploit residual redundancy after quantization. The central empirical claim is that KV tensors contain large, exploitable redundancy across heads and layers, enabling approximately 20× compression versus a 16-bit baseline with negligible degradation across a broad set of accuracy and long-context benchmarks, with materially higher compression (≥40×) available at modest quality cost in some regimes. The system claim is that such compression materially improves the economics of multi-turn, prefix-reuse serving by extending effective KV cache capacity in GPU HBM and host tiers (DRAM/NVMe) and by reducing inter-node and GPU↔host bandwidth demands, thereby improving cache hit rates and reducing time-to-first-token (TTFT) relative to recomputation when caches would otherwise be evicted. KV CACHE AS THE DOMINANT STATE VARIABLE IN INFERENCE ECONOMICS KV cache growth is linear in context length and is multiplicative in layers and attention heads, making it an increasingly dominant constraint as (a) context lengths expand, (b) models add layers and maintain large hidden dimensions, and (c) production workloads shift toward iterative and tool-augmented interactions that repeatedly reuse long prefixes. The paper uses the canonical 16-bit KV cache size formula (4·l·h·d_head·t) bytes and reports 16-bit KV cache sizes per 1K tokens of context that are already operationally large: 128MiB for Llama 3.1 8B, 160MiB for Mistral NeMo 12B, and 320MiB for Llama 3.3 70B Instruct. In binary units, these figures imply per-token KV footprints of 128KiB/token (Llama 3.1 8B), 160KiB/token (Mistral NeMo 12B), and 320KiB/token (Llama 3.3 70B Instruct) at 16-bit. For a 10K-token prompt (10×1K in the paper’s binary convention), the 16-bit KV cache sizes scale to approximately 1.25GiB (Llama 3.1 8B), 1.56GiB (Mistral NeMo 12B), and 3.13GiB (Llama 3.3 70B Instruct). These magnitudes explain why stale caches create a throughput–latency dilemma: retaining them in HBM maximizes responsiveness on future turns but crowds out concurrent sessions; evicting them forces quadratic-cost prefill recomputation and increases TTFT; offloading them to host or storage introduces large transfer overhead and consumes DRAM/NVMe capacity. A key operational nuance emphasized is that modern serving stacks increasingly treat KV caches as a database, leveraging block paging and shared-prefix reuse. In the common disaggregated serving design (separate prefill and decode nodes), KV cache transfer becomes a dominant category of cross-node traffic. Under that design, any reduction in KV cache size directly increases effective fabric capacity and reduces tail latency attributable to congestion, while also enabling longer cache lifetimes in “hot” (HBM) and “warm” (CPU DRAM) tiers that raise cache hit rates and reduce recomputation frequency. The paper’s quantitative example illustrates the economic stakes: a 1,000-line code file tokenized at ~10 tokens/line yields ~10K tokens; for Llama 3.3 70B, an 8-bit KV cache for that context is ~1.6GiB. Reuse across subsequent turns or parallel chats around the same file is valuable, but HBM scarcity makes retaining many such caches infeasible without compression. TECHNICAL MECHANISM: WHY KV CACHES ARE COMPRESSIBLE AND HOW KVTC EXPLOITS IT The technical rationale begins with an empirical observation: keys (and, to a lesser extent, values) across different attention heads can be aligned into a shared latent space using orthogonal transformations (Procrustes alignment). This supports the hypothesis that head-specific projections introduce rotations of a common subspace rather than completely distinct information, implying that concatenating across heads and layers should reveal low-rank structure suitable for linear decorrelation and dimensionality reduction. The method operationalizes this using a PCA/SVD basis learned from calibration data rather than recomputing a decomposition per prompt. This design choice targets production viability: per-prompt SVD is computationally expensive and scales poorly with long prompts and frequent cache updates. kvtc is explicitly structured as an offline-calibrated, online-applied codec: Calibration (performed 1 time per model and compression setting for DP allocation) A calibration dataset is forwarded through the model to collect KV caches. Token positions are pooled, and a subset of positions is sampled. Keys and values are processed separately. Several implementation choices are highlighted as decisive for stability: Rotary positional embeddings are effectively removed prior to compression (“undo positional rotations”), because positional rotations degrade the apparent low-rank structure of keys. “Attention sink” tokens (the earliest tokens in the sequence) and a sliding window of most recent tokens are excluded from compression because they disproportionately affect attention patterns and are empirically more sensitive to reconstruction error. Cross-layer concatenation is used: keys (or values) from multiple layers and heads at the same token position are concatenated along the feature axis to form a higher-dimensional feature vector. PCA is computed over these concatenated vectors, improving robustness relative to per-layer or per-head PCA. The PCA basis is computed via SVD of centered calibration data, using randomized SVD for scalability with a target rank cutoff. The paper reports calibration regimes of 160K tokens for several models with a 10K PCA dimension cutoff (8K for Qwen variants with fewer KV heads), selected to fit within a single 80GB H100 memory envelope and complete within minutes. A critical economic detail is that the same PCA basis can be reused across multiple compression ratios; only the DP-derived precision assignment changes per compression target. Compression (applied between inference phases) Compression operates on stored KV cache tensors, not on weights, and does not modify attention computation. The KV cache is projected into the PCA basis, quantized, packed, and then entropy-coded. Compression is positioned as a background or between-phase operation (after decoding, or between prefill and decode), executed on GPU or CPU depending on where the cache currently resides. The design intent is that compression should not sit on the critical per-token decoding path; it is a storage and transport optimization. Decompression (performed prior to reuse) Decompression reverses the entropy coding and quantization and applies the inverse PCA projection. A practical latency optimization is proposed: inverse projection can be performed layer-by-layer using submatrices of the PCA basis, allowing generation to begin before the full cache is reconstructed, reducing TTFT. Quantization and bit allocation are the core differentiators versus simpler PCA truncation. PCA provides ordered components by variance; kvtc uses DP to allocate a global bit budget across PCA coordinates (and across groups of coordinates) to minimize reconstruction error in the decorrelated domain. Groups of subsequent PCA coordinates share 16-bit shift and scale factors (a microscaling-inspired design), and the DP algorithm jointly selects group size and precision type under a bit budget, including the overhead of per-group metadata. DP commonly assigns 0 bits to many trailing PCA components, which both increases compression and provides a mechanism to trim the PCA basis to the subset of components that actually carry payload, reducing compute and storage overhead of the projection matrices in deployment. Lossless entropy coding then exploits the structure induced by quantization. DEFLATE is used in the reference implementation, and the paper emphasizes that the incremental gain from the lossless stage is content-dependent but meaningful, with an average uplift of ~1.23× on top of quantization in the reported regime. An ablation in the appendices indicates that GPU-friendly variants (GDeflate) can achieve nearly identical compression ratios (≤0.1 difference in measured cases), implying that throughput-optimized lossless codecs can likely be substituted without sacrificing meaningful compression. EMPIRICAL RESULTS: ACCURACY, COMPRESSION, AND LATENCY General-purpose 8B–12B dense models The paper evaluates Llama 3.1 8B, MN-Minitron 8B, and Mistral NeMo 12B across math/knowledge (GSM8K, MMLU) and long-context tasks (Qasper, Lost in the Middle, RULER Variable Tracking) under a simulated multi-turn regime where compression/decompression is applied periodically, with a sliding window of recent tokens excluded. A consistent pattern appears: kvtc maintains near-vanilla performance through 16× compression settings, and remains competitive at 32×, with degradation becoming task- and model-dependent at 64×, particularly on long-context retrieval metrics when compression is pushed aggressively. Selected quantitative anchor points from the paper’s standard-error table (all values are reported with the paper’s evaluation setup and token-window exclusions): Llama 3.1 8B Vanilla: GSM8K 56.8, MMLU 60.5, Qasper 40.4, LITM 99.4, RULER-VT 99.8 kvtc16×: GSM8K 56.9, MMLU 60.1, Qasper 40.7, LITM 99.3, RULER-VT 99.1 kvtc32×: GSM8K 57.8, MMLU 60.6, Qasper 39.4, LITM 99.1, RULER-VT 98.9 kvtc64×: GSM8K 57.2, MMLU 60.7, Qasper 37.8, LITM 90.2, RULER-VT 95.9 These results indicate that, for this model, long-context sensitivity emerges at 64× with meaningful drops in LITM and RULER-VT, while math/knowledge scores remain stable, implying a differential sensitivity consistent with key-vector precision being more critical for retrieval-style behavior. Mistral NeMo 12B Vanilla: GSM8K 61.9, MMLU 64.5, Qasper 38.4, LITM 99.5, RULER-VT 99.8 kvtc16×: GSM8K 62.0, MMLU 64.4, Qasper 37.6, LITM 99.8, RULER-VT 99.5 kvtc32×: GSM8K 62.2, MMLU 63.8, Qasper 37.5, LITM 99.6, RULER-VT 98.7 kvtc64×: GSM8K 61.9, MMLU 61.4, Qasper 38.0, LITM 95.3, RULER-VT 98.0 Here, degradation at 64× is visible but materially smaller than the Llama 3.1 8B LITM drop, suggesting model-architecture or training-data differences can change the tolerance envelope for aggressive KV cache distortion. MN-Minitron 8B Vanilla: GSM8K 59.1, MMLU 64.3, Qasper 38.2, LITM 99.8, RULER-VT 99.4 kvtc16×: GSM8K 60.3, MMLU 64.1, Qasper 38.6, LITM 99.3, RULER-VT 98.8 kvtc32×: GSM8K 59.1, MMLU 63.7, Qasper 37.7, LITM 86.9, RULER-VT 96.0 kvtc64×: GSM8K 57.8, MMLU 62.1, Qasper 38.1, LITM 59.5, RULER-VT 93.4 This model shows markedly higher sensitivity on LITM at 32× and 64×, despite stable short-context metrics, reinforcing that “compression safety” is not monotonic in parameter count and that pruning/distillation choices can alter KV cache redundancy or robustness. Comparisons to baselines The paper compares kvtc to quantization baselines (KIVI, GEAR, FP8) and eviction baselines (H2O, TOVA), plus an SVD-based prefill-optimization method (xKV). Across the reported tasks: Low-bit quantization methods at modest compression (2-bit KV schemes) show earlier degradation in long-context behavior than kvtc at substantially higher compression settings. Eviction methods perform poorly as generic compressors for long-context tasks, consistent with their objective function (selective pruning) being misaligned with “lossless-ish storage for reuse.” xKV shows competitive results on some tasks but a consistent underperformance on Qasper relative to kvtc and vanilla in the provided tables, consistent with method-specific distortions introduced by its decomposition regime. Reasoning models and high-variance tasks For DeepSeek-R1-distilled Qwen 2.5 reasoning models, the paper evaluates AIME 2024/2025 and LiveCodeBench coding. Results are averaged over 8 runs with large variance, but a key inference is that kvtc at ~9×–21× compression achieves broadly similar AIME scores within variance bands, while coding performance remains stable at ~9× and degrades more visibly at ~18×–21× on the 7B model. An important nuance is that smaller reasoning models already have smaller KV footprints (reported ~29KiB/token for Qwen R1 1.5B versus 131KiB/token for Llama 3.1 8B), so the economic value of aggressive KV cache compression is proportionally higher for large models and long contexts than for small models with short contexts, unless the serving system’s bottleneck is dominated by cache transfer rather than HBM capacity. Multi-GPU inference and pipeline parallel For Llama 3.3 70B Instruct run pipeline-parallel across 4 GPUs (20 layers per GPU), the paper compresses KV cache chunks independently per GPU. On MATH-500, the reported accuracy declines from 75.6 (vanilla) to 74.4 at 10× and 72.6 at 20×, with standard errors near ~1.9. NIAH and LITM remain at 100.0 for all tested ratios in that table. The paper notes that joint compression across chunks could improve accuracy for some offload scenarios but is not required for feasibility, highlighting an engineering trade-off between deployment simplicity in distributed settings and optimal global compression. Latency and TTFT economics A critical system result is the measured compression/decompression latency on an H100 for a non-fused implementation. For Mistral NeMo 12B in bfloat16: BS=8, CTX=8K: compression 379ms, decompression 267ms; vanilla recompute TTFT 3098ms; kvtc decompression TTFT 380ms BS=2, CTX=16K: compression 194ms, decompression 143ms; vanilla recompute TTFT 1780ms; kvtc decompression TTFT 208ms These measurements imply that, when a cache would otherwise be recomputed, decompressing a stored compressed cache can reduce TTFT by ~8×–9× in these scenarios, even without kernel fusion. The decomposition of runtime shows PCA projection and entropy coding as the largest contributors, implying that GPU-optimized kernels and faster GPU-native lossless codecs could reduce overhead further. The fundamental economic conclusion is that, in multi-turn settings with long prefixes, compression-induced overhead is likely dominated by the avoided prefill compute and avoided transfer overhead for uncompressed caches. KEY DEPLOYMENT-SENSITIVE DESIGN CHOICES AND FAILURE MODES Several design choices appear to be “hard requirements” rather than optional optimizations: Sink tokens and sliding window exclusions The paper’s ablations show that compressing early “sink” tokens can catastrophically degrade accuracy at high compression ratios (example: Llama 3.1 8B at 64× collapses on multiple tasks when sink tokens are compressed). Similarly, compressing the most recent tokens hurts performance, motivating a sliding window (default 128 tokens) that remains uncompressed. This introduces a predictable engineering constraint: kvtc is not a uniform compression of the full cache; it is a policy-driven, token-position-dependent codec. Production integration therefore requires correct handling of token positions, attention sinks, and window management, and these policies must be aligned with attention-kernel behavior and model-specific sink dynamics. RoPE handling Removing positional rotations prior to compression is described as important for preserving low-rank structure. In deployment, this implies that the codec must be position-aware and must invert and reapply RoPE correctly. This is an additional source of complexity relative to pure per-token quantization and is sensitive to model variants and RoPE parameterizations. Calibration set representativeness The method’s quality hinges on the PCA basis generalizing from calibration data to production data. The paper demonstrates relative stability with 160K–200K calibration tokens and explores domain shifts (general web text vs math traces vs code). Results suggest that moderate domain mismatch is tolerated at 16×–64×, while extreme compression (e.g., 256× in ablations) becomes materially more sensitive to calibration choice. In production, this implies that operators targeting the “negligible degradation” regime should be able to calibrate with broadly representative corpora, while operators targeting ultra-high compression for specialized workloads should expect tighter coupling between calibration domain and achieved quality. PCA matrix storage overhead and operational footprint A non-trivial hidden cost is the need to store PCA projection matrices per model. The paper reports that, prior to DP trimming, PCA matrices stored at 16-bit can amount to a meaningful fraction of model parameter count (examples reported: ~2.4% for Llama 3.3 70B, ~8.7% for Llama 3.1 8B). This overhead is amortized across all cached sessions for a model but competes with HBM/DRAM budgets in multi-model serving. DP-driven trimming can reduce this overhead at higher compression ratios by removing zero-bit components, but the directionality is not guaranteed at low compression ratios if many components remain active. In distributed inference (pipeline parallel), per-chunk PCA can reduce matrix sizes, but may reduce cross-layer decorrelation benefits if fewer layers are concatenated. SYSTEM-LEVEL IMPLICATIONS FOR GENERATIVE AI INFRASTRUCTURE GPU AND HBM The principal infrastructure implication is that KV cache compression at storage time targets the dominant memory allocator stressor in stateful serving: the accumulation of idle or warm conversation state. For workloads with long reusable prefixes (code assistants, enterprise agents with large system prompts, repeated RAG scaffolds, document chat), the limiting resource frequently becomes HBM reserved for KV caches rather than compute. By compressing stale caches by ~20× (or more), the same HBM budget can retain a materially larger working set of cached prefixes, increasing cache hit rates and reducing recomputation. This effect is multiplicative with cache-aware routing and prefix sharing: more prefixes can remain resident (hot or warm) and can be routed to nodes that already hold them, improving both throughput and tail latency. However, kvtc as described does not reduce the active KV cache footprint during the actual attention computation for a currently decoding sequence, because the model operates on decompressed KV caches during decoding. Therefore, the method does not directly reduce HBM bandwidth consumed by attention kernels during steady-state decode, and does not directly address the “memory traffic per generated token” bottleneck that motivates online KV quantization and eviction strategies. The primary HBM benefit is increased effective capacity for caches between turns and reduced HBM pressure from storing many idle sessions, not reduced per-token decode bandwidth. Compression and decompression themselves consume GPU compute and memory bandwidth. The measured decompression TTFT of ~208ms–380ms in the provided benchmarks indicates that the overhead is real but can be materially smaller than recomputation of long prefixes. In an HBM-constrained serving environment, this overhead can be interpreted as a trade between (a) maintaining more caches warm and paying decompression on reuse versus (b) evicting caches and paying full prefill recomputation. The decision boundary will depend on distribution of inter-turn idle times, probability of reuse, and SLA sensitivity to TTFT. kvtc expands the feasible region where keeping caches is economically rational, especially for long prompts. CPU AND DRAM The method implies a stronger role for CPU DRAM as a warm KV cache tier. A ~20× compression ratio changes the practical scale of “warm state” that can be stored per server. Using the paper’s reported KV cache sizes, a 10K-token 16-bit KV cache for Llama 3.3 70B is ~3.13GiB; compressing by ~20× would reduce this to ~160MiB. At that size, storing hundreds to thousands of warm conversation states in DRAM becomes materially more feasible, increasing cache hit rates and reducing NVMe dependence. This can shift system design from “HBM-only hot caches with aggressive eviction” toward “HBM hot + DRAM warm with long retention,” which is structurally analogous to CPU page cache hierarchies in classical systems design. CPU compute implications depend on where compression is executed. The paper explicitly allows compression on CPU if the cache is already in storage, but the strongest bandwidth savings are achieved when compression happens before moving KV caches off the GPU. If an operator chooses GPU-side compression prior to PCIe/NVLink transfer, CPU compute overhead is modest (orchestrating and DP calibration offline). If an operator instead transfers uncompressed caches to CPU for compression, bandwidth savings are forfeited and CPU memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck. Therefore, the most economically coherent deployment path is GPU-native compression/decompression with CPU DRAM used as the warm storage reservoir.

TheValueist

16,549 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

Inkling, Thinking Machines' first open model, dropped today: 975B total / 41B active MoE, up to 1M context, reasoning natively over text, images, and audio. Serving and RL support are already live: you can run and shape it on an open stack, starting now. Day 0 support on SGLang SGLang and Miles RadixArk👇 - Inkling's new architecture (ShortConv, attention with relative positional embedding, shared expert sink MoE) is natively implemented and deeply optimized, with prefill full CUDA graph and MXFP8 KV cache - Full parameter and LoRA RL in a customized Megatron backend, train inference consistency via customized kernels, routing replay, and cross-runtime parameter synchronization - DFlash speculative decoding from Modal for low-latency serving Launching now, blog and cookbook in the comments ⬇️
1:01

Inkling, Thinking Machines' first open model, dropped today: 975B total / 41B active MoE, up to 1M context, reasoning natively over text, images, and audio. Serving and RL support are already live: you can run and shape it on an open stack, starting now. Day 0 support on SGLang SGLang and Miles RadixArk👇 - Inkling's new architecture (ShortConv, attention with relative positional embedding, shared expert sink MoE) is natively implemented and deeply optimized, with prefill full CUDA graph and MXFP8 KV cache - Full parameter and LoRA RL in a customized Megatron backend, train inference consistency via customized kernels, routing replay, and cross-runtime parameter synchronization - DFlash speculative decoding from Modal for low-latency serving Launching now, blog and cookbook in the comments ⬇️

LMSYS Org

146,298 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

QVAC SDK 0.12.0 is now live, bringing longer context, increased memory optimisation, new modalities, and broader ecosystem support directly to your device. Key Features and Updates: - TurboQuant KV-Cache Quantization: Fit much longer context in the same memory. TurboQuant, an algorithm from Google Research, compresses the KV cache by up to 5x, near-lossless. - Text-to-Video: Generate video from a text prompt, fully local, with the new wan2.1 model in the Diffusion addon - Apple Metal Performance for Flux2-klein: Diffusion on Apple Silicon now matches MLX performance, the native benchmark for Apple GPUs - Robot Control (new VLA addon): A GGML-based Vision-Language-Action addon brings fast, efficient robot control to edge devices - Coding Assistant / Harness Support: QVAC now works with OpenCode and OpenClaw as a local provider. A new @qvac/ai-sdk-provider package automates model registry and provider integration - Cross-Platform Voice: Text-to-speech and Parakeet transcription moved from ONNX to the GGML engine for better CPU and GPU support on macOS, iOS, Windows, Linux, and Android. Parakeet also adds long-term streaming diarization (tracking who spoke when on live audio) - Faster Lightweight Visual Classification: A new GGML-based Classification addon delivers millisecond-level classification, useful where a vision-language model (VLM) would be unnecessarily slow - Under the Hood: Fabric synced to llama.cpp v8828 (from v8189), plus GPU acceleration added to image-upscale models for faster results Full release notes:
1:29

QVAC SDK 0.12.0 is now live, bringing longer context, increased memory optimisation, new modalities, and broader ecosystem support directly to your device. Key Features and Updates: - TurboQuant KV-Cache Quantization: Fit much longer context in the same memory. TurboQuant, an algorithm from Google Research, compresses the KV cache by up to 5x, near-lossless. - Text-to-Video: Generate video from a text prompt, fully local, with the new wan2.1 model in the Diffusion addon - Apple Metal Performance for Flux2-klein: Diffusion on Apple Silicon now matches MLX performance, the native benchmark for Apple GPUs - Robot Control (new VLA addon): A GGML-based Vision-Language-Action addon brings fast, efficient robot control to edge devices - Coding Assistant / Harness Support: QVAC now works with OpenCode and OpenClaw as a local provider. A new @qvac/ai-sdk-provider package automates model registry and provider integration - Cross-Platform Voice: Text-to-speech and Parakeet transcription moved from ONNX to the GGML engine for better CPU and GPU support on macOS, iOS, Windows, Linux, and Android. Parakeet also adds long-term streaming diarization (tracking who spoke when on live audio) - Faster Lightweight Visual Classification: A new GGML-based Classification addon delivers millisecond-level classification, useful where a vision-language model (VLM) would be unnecessarily slow - Under the Hood: Fabric synced to llama.cpp v8828 (from v8189), plus GPU acceleration added to image-upscale models for faster results Full release notes:

QVAC

9,932,369 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

A single RTX 4090 (24 GB VRAM) can run the updated gemma 4 31B (dense) model with a 190,000 context window at 33 tokens/second. The VRAM barrier is dying. Google quietly updated Gemma 4, and Unsloth immediately compiled the new quants. I built llama.cpp from source on Ubuntu 22 to benchmark it. Google's stealth update 2 days ago enabled uniform Flash Attention 4 on Hopper to boost prefill and patched the chat template to improve tool calling. The agentic reasoning gains on the benchmark charts are massive: TB2 (Agents): +4.5% (to 25.8%) Tau2 (Telecom): +10.1% (to 62.7%) Running on Ubuntu 22, CUDA 13.0 with a single NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Here is the exact step by step benchmarking process with a massive 28k tokens prompt and the commands I used to squeeze out maximum context without killing my throughput: # 1. The Baseline (Unquantized KV Cache) I started with full GPU offload (-ngl 99) and pushed the context to 40k. llama.cpp flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -ngl 99 -c 40000 -fa on --port 8080 -v VRAM: 23.8 GB (maxed out on card) Throughput: Prefill: 2198.81 t/s | Decode: 35.77 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) # 2. The CPU Split Trap I tried stretching to 80k context by offloading layers to the CPU (-ngl 52). llama.cpp flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 80000 -ngl 52 -fa on --port 8080 -v Throughput: Prefill: 1212.73 t/s | Decode: 5 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) # 3. The KV Quantization Breakthrough Instead of spilling layers to the CPU, I kept the model fully on card (-ngl 99) but enabled 8-bit KV cache quantization to free up VRAM. flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 100000 --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v q8_0 -ngl 99 --port 8080 -v VRAM: 23.9 GB Throughput: Prefill: 2139.68 t/s | Decode: 32 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) Result: 100k tokens of context on a single GPU with practically zero speed loss (and minimal intelligence loss). # 4. The Limit Test (Q4 KV Cache) To find the absolute breaking point, I dropped the KV cache to 4 bit (q4_0) and set -c 190000. flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 190000 --cache-type-k q4_0 --cache-type-v q4_0 -ngl 99 --port 8080 -v VRAM: 23.8 GB Throughput: Prefill: 2206.66 t/s | Decode: 33 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) (Note: Pushing it to 220k required dropping to -ngl 58 again, which immediately penalized decode down to 17 t/s). # The Tradeoff: For Max Reasoning: Keep your KV cache unquantized (f16). You get pristine reasoning but hit a strict 40k context ceiling. For Massive Document Retrieval: If you need to feed the model giant codebases, use --cache-type-k q4_0. Getting 190k context at 33 tokens/second on a consumer desktop with a 31b dense model is a cheat code. If you’re rocking a single 3090 or 4090 and slept on Gemma 4 earlier, this update is your cue to dust off the terminal. Hugging Face links to the Unsloth QAT quants are in the replies below.
0:20

A single RTX 4090 (24 GB VRAM) can run the updated gemma 4 31B (dense) model with a 190,000 context window at 33 tokens/second. The VRAM barrier is dying. Google quietly updated Gemma 4, and Unsloth immediately compiled the new quants. I built llama.cpp from source on Ubuntu 22 to benchmark it. Google's stealth update 2 days ago enabled uniform Flash Attention 4 on Hopper to boost prefill and patched the chat template to improve tool calling. The agentic reasoning gains on the benchmark charts are massive: TB2 (Agents): +4.5% (to 25.8%) Tau2 (Telecom): +10.1% (to 62.7%) Running on Ubuntu 22, CUDA 13.0 with a single NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. Here is the exact step by step benchmarking process with a massive 28k tokens prompt and the commands I used to squeeze out maximum context without killing my throughput: # 1. The Baseline (Unquantized KV Cache) I started with full GPU offload (-ngl 99) and pushed the context to 40k. llama.cpp flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -ngl 99 -c 40000 -fa on --port 8080 -v VRAM: 23.8 GB (maxed out on card) Throughput: Prefill: 2198.81 t/s | Decode: 35.77 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) # 2. The CPU Split Trap I tried stretching to 80k context by offloading layers to the CPU (-ngl 52). llama.cpp flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 80000 -ngl 52 -fa on --port 8080 -v Throughput: Prefill: 1212.73 t/s | Decode: 5 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) # 3. The KV Quantization Breakthrough Instead of spilling layers to the CPU, I kept the model fully on card (-ngl 99) but enabled 8-bit KV cache quantization to free up VRAM. flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 100000 --cache-type-k q8_0 --cache-type-v q8_0 -ngl 99 --port 8080 -v VRAM: 23.9 GB Throughput: Prefill: 2139.68 t/s | Decode: 32 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) Result: 100k tokens of context on a single GPU with practically zero speed loss (and minimal intelligence loss). # 4. The Limit Test (Q4 KV Cache) To find the absolute breaking point, I dropped the KV cache to 4 bit (q4_0) and set -c 190000. flags: ./build/bin/llama-server -m gemma-4-31B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 190000 --cache-type-k q4_0 --cache-type-v q4_0 -ngl 99 --port 8080 -v VRAM: 23.8 GB Throughput: Prefill: 2206.66 t/s | Decode: 33 t/s (with 28k tokens prompt) (Note: Pushing it to 220k required dropping to -ngl 58 again, which immediately penalized decode down to 17 t/s). # The Tradeoff: For Max Reasoning: Keep your KV cache unquantized (f16). You get pristine reasoning but hit a strict 40k context ceiling. For Massive Document Retrieval: If you need to feed the model giant codebases, use --cache-type-k q4_0. Getting 190k context at 33 tokens/second on a consumer desktop with a 31b dense model is a cheat code. If you’re rocking a single 3090 or 4090 and slept on Gemma 4 earlier, this update is your cue to dust off the terminal. Hugging Face links to the Unsloth QAT quants are in the replies below.

Alok

76,069 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

I've migrated the old Mast3r-SLAM example I had made last year to the latest version of Rerun and made a bunch of improvements! I wanted to spend some time with agents to modernize it. Here's an example of me walking around with my iPhone and getting a dense reconstruction at about 10FPS on a 5090. Heres the following improvements I made. Brought it into the monorepo with proper packaging: • Using prefix.dev pixi-build to get rid of all the mast3r/asmk/lietorch vendored code with just a few small patches. This let me remove so 60k lines of code from the repo! • Don't have to build the lietorch code on my machine anymore, which was taking ~10 minutes to compile (and also made it work on blackwell when it previously did not) Rebuilt the Gradio interface: • Fixed incremental updates, .MOV uploads, and stop behavior • Made the CLI + Gradio interface share the same entry point so updates automatically propagate Upgraded the Rerun integration: • Switched to a multiprocessing async logging strategy • Added video/pointmap/confidence logging • Improved blueprint layout and hid noisy entities from 3D view • Biggest perf win was the async background logger - documented about a ~2.5x speedup from decoupling logging from tracking The newest and most interesting part was my attempt to replace the CUDA kernels for Gauss-Newton ray matching with a Modular Mojo backend. As a Python dev, every time I look at CUDA code I basically shy away as it's pretty difficult for me to understand. Mojo let me rewrite the matching logic in a syntax I'm more comfortable with while still getting near-CUDA performance. Mojo is now the default matching backend with CUDA fallback. One major piece that's missing is the custom PyTorch op path, but I'll eventually do that as well. I heavily leaned on Claude Code to do the CUDA → Mojo migration, and I have no doubt it's not the cleanest or most idiomatic, BUT it's way more readable for me and helps me better understand the underlying algorithm. This was a ton of work, and a large part of why I'm doing it is how the monorepo compounds. This becomes an artifact for the next example I want to build with Claude that I can point to, which will make it even faster to implement. The compounding nature of this is really interesting and part of why I'm spending so much time trying to make things nice and readable.
0:21

I've migrated the old Mast3r-SLAM example I had made last year to the latest version of Rerun and made a bunch of improvements! I wanted to spend some time with agents to modernize it. Here's an example of me walking around with my iPhone and getting a dense reconstruction at about 10FPS on a 5090. Heres the following improvements I made. Brought it into the monorepo with proper packaging: • Using prefix.dev pixi-build to get rid of all the mast3r/asmk/lietorch vendored code with just a few small patches. This let me remove so 60k lines of code from the repo! • Don't have to build the lietorch code on my machine anymore, which was taking ~10 minutes to compile (and also made it work on blackwell when it previously did not) Rebuilt the Gradio interface: • Fixed incremental updates, .MOV uploads, and stop behavior • Made the CLI + Gradio interface share the same entry point so updates automatically propagate Upgraded the Rerun integration: • Switched to a multiprocessing async logging strategy • Added video/pointmap/confidence logging • Improved blueprint layout and hid noisy entities from 3D view • Biggest perf win was the async background logger - documented about a ~2.5x speedup from decoupling logging from tracking The newest and most interesting part was my attempt to replace the CUDA kernels for Gauss-Newton ray matching with a Modular Mojo backend. As a Python dev, every time I look at CUDA code I basically shy away as it's pretty difficult for me to understand. Mojo let me rewrite the matching logic in a syntax I'm more comfortable with while still getting near-CUDA performance. Mojo is now the default matching backend with CUDA fallback. One major piece that's missing is the custom PyTorch op path, but I'll eventually do that as well. I heavily leaned on Claude Code to do the CUDA → Mojo migration, and I have no doubt it's not the cleanest or most idiomatic, BUT it's way more readable for me and helps me better understand the underlying algorithm. This was a ton of work, and a large part of why I'm doing it is how the monorepo compounds. This becomes an artifact for the next example I want to build with Claude that I can point to, which will make it even faster to implement. The compounding nature of this is really interesting and part of why I'm spending so much time trying to make things nice and readable.

Pablo Vela

42,661 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

I just crammed the updated Gemma 4 26B A4B QAT (MoE) with 180k context into an 8GB RTX 4060 (8 GB VRAM + 16 GB RAM only!!) and optimized the batch size. 23 tokens/sec decode, 300 tokens/sec prefill Yesterday I showed you a Gemma 4 31B dense model running flawlessly on an RTX 4090. Today, we're breaking the VRAM bank on a budget card using Unsloth’s new Gemma 4 26B (A4B) QAT quants. Following Google’s chat template update that boosted agentic benchmarks by +10%, I pushed this model to its absolute limits. Here is how you squeeze 250k context out of 8GB of VRAM. # The Setup & The Optimization - Hardware: Nvidia RTX 4060 (8GB VRAM) + 16GB System RAM - Environment: CUDA 13.0 build of llama.cpp - Model: gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf - Prompt: 28,000 tokens of prompt for each run If you read my L2 cache breakdown (attached in replies), you know the 4060’s 24MB cache maxes out at `-b 1024 -ub 1024`. Push past that, and prefill crashes. I locked those flags in for every test below to ensure maximum GEMM throughput. # 1. The Raw Context Push (Unquantized KV Cache) First, I wanted to see how far pure 8GB VRAM + 16GB RAM could stretch without touching the KV cache: - 80k Context: Prefill 385 t/s | Decode 25.5 t/s - 120k Context: Prefill 270 t/s | Decode 24 t/s llama.cpp flags: .\llama-server -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 120000 --port 8080 -ub 1024 -b 1024 Without KV quantization, 120k is your hard ceiling. push past that prefill throughput drops off a cliff, making the model practically unusable for large agentic workloads. # 2. The Q8 KV Cache Lifeline To survive 250k context on a budget card, you have to quantize the KV cache. I enabled 8 bit KV cache (`-ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0`) and re ran: - 180k Context: Prefill 280 t/s | Decode 22.8 t/s - 250k Context: Prefill 115 t/s | Decode 20 t/s llama.cpp flags: .\llama-server -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 180000 --port 8080 -b 1024 -ub 1024 -ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0 Result: Q8 KV cache brings 250k context back from the dead. Decode speed stabilizes at a highly usable 20 t/s. You are trading a very small bit amount of reasoning precision for an extra 130,000 tokens of context window. if you own a single rtx 3050, 3060, 3070, 4050, 4060, 5050 or 5060, you must try this model and optimize your batch size for higher prefill. Hugging Face links to the updated Unsloth's QAT quants and performance graph are in the replies below. What model are you running on your 6GB, 8GB or 12GB cards right now? Let's see your setups.
0:20

I just crammed the updated Gemma 4 26B A4B QAT (MoE) with 180k context into an 8GB RTX 4060 (8 GB VRAM + 16 GB RAM only!!) and optimized the batch size. 23 tokens/sec decode, 300 tokens/sec prefill Yesterday I showed you a Gemma 4 31B dense model running flawlessly on an RTX 4090. Today, we're breaking the VRAM bank on a budget card using Unsloth’s new Gemma 4 26B (A4B) QAT quants. Following Google’s chat template update that boosted agentic benchmarks by +10%, I pushed this model to its absolute limits. Here is how you squeeze 250k context out of 8GB of VRAM. # The Setup & The Optimization - Hardware: Nvidia RTX 4060 (8GB VRAM) + 16GB System RAM - Environment: CUDA 13.0 build of llama.cpp - Model: gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf - Prompt: 28,000 tokens of prompt for each run If you read my L2 cache breakdown (attached in replies), you know the 4060’s 24MB cache maxes out at `-b 1024 -ub 1024`. Push past that, and prefill crashes. I locked those flags in for every test below to ensure maximum GEMM throughput. # 1. The Raw Context Push (Unquantized KV Cache) First, I wanted to see how far pure 8GB VRAM + 16GB RAM could stretch without touching the KV cache: - 80k Context: Prefill 385 t/s | Decode 25.5 t/s - 120k Context: Prefill 270 t/s | Decode 24 t/s llama.cpp flags: .\llama-server -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 120000 --port 8080 -ub 1024 -b 1024 Without KV quantization, 120k is your hard ceiling. push past that prefill throughput drops off a cliff, making the model practically unusable for large agentic workloads. # 2. The Q8 KV Cache Lifeline To survive 250k context on a budget card, you have to quantize the KV cache. I enabled 8 bit KV cache (`-ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0`) and re ran: - 180k Context: Prefill 280 t/s | Decode 22.8 t/s - 250k Context: Prefill 115 t/s | Decode 20 t/s llama.cpp flags: .\llama-server -m gemma-4-26B-A4B-it-qat-UD-Q4_K_XL.gguf -c 180000 --port 8080 -b 1024 -ub 1024 -ctk q8_0 -ctv q8_0 Result: Q8 KV cache brings 250k context back from the dead. Decode speed stabilizes at a highly usable 20 t/s. You are trading a very small bit amount of reasoning precision for an extra 130,000 tokens of context window. if you own a single rtx 3050, 3060, 3070, 4050, 4060, 5050 or 5060, you must try this model and optimize your batch size for higher prefill. Hugging Face links to the updated Unsloth's QAT quants and performance graph are in the replies below. What model are you running on your 6GB, 8GB or 12GB cards right now? Let's see your setups.

Alok

36,617 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

QVAC SDK 0.14.0 is live. This release makes the on-device stack faster on mobile, ships the developer-agent path, and takes local text-to-speech to 31 languages. Main highlights: - OpenCode and OpenClaw. The first official OpenCode plugin, plus a maintained OpenClaw compatibility path, both built on managed mode and qvac serve. Point a coding agent at a local model with far less setup and far fewer surprises. - Brain-computer interface transcription, on the SDK. Take recorded neural signal data and decode it into text, fully on-device, no cloud. Stream it in chunks through a simple API. In 0.14 it runs GPU-accelerated on iOS. - Text to Speech in 31 languages with our Supertonic3 upgrade. VOICE AND SPEECH - Supertonic3 multilingual TTS, 5 languages to 31. - Chatterbox and Supertonic now run on the Android GPU, with lower memory use (especially on iOS), quantized s3gen Chatterbox support, and a fix for Chatterbox occasionally emitting random speech. - Whisper transcription now runs on the iOS GPU. Parakeet runs on the Android GPU, with steadier real-time streaming. VISION AND OCR - VLM multi-tile batching: high-resolution Pan and Scan images are encoded in one pass instead of tile by tile, for faster vision throughput. - OCR on ggml (EasyOCR and DocTR) reaches full speed parity with the onnx path, across Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan. PLATFORM AND RELIABILITY - Dynamic compute backends on Linux: one build picks the right backend at runtime, and opens the door to ROCm and CUDA support without per-backend builds. - Thinking tokens are kept out of the model context, so reasoning no longer fills the KV cache. SDK 0.14.0 is now leaner and faster to start. Let’s build.
1:51

QVAC SDK 0.14.0 is live. This release makes the on-device stack faster on mobile, ships the developer-agent path, and takes local text-to-speech to 31 languages. Main highlights: - OpenCode and OpenClaw. The first official OpenCode plugin, plus a maintained OpenClaw compatibility path, both built on managed mode and qvac serve. Point a coding agent at a local model with far less setup and far fewer surprises. - Brain-computer interface transcription, on the SDK. Take recorded neural signal data and decode it into text, fully on-device, no cloud. Stream it in chunks through a simple API. In 0.14 it runs GPU-accelerated on iOS. - Text to Speech in 31 languages with our Supertonic3 upgrade. VOICE AND SPEECH - Supertonic3 multilingual TTS, 5 languages to 31. - Chatterbox and Supertonic now run on the Android GPU, with lower memory use (especially on iOS), quantized s3gen Chatterbox support, and a fix for Chatterbox occasionally emitting random speech. - Whisper transcription now runs on the iOS GPU. Parakeet runs on the Android GPU, with steadier real-time streaming. VISION AND OCR - VLM multi-tile batching: high-resolution Pan and Scan images are encoded in one pass instead of tile by tile, for faster vision throughput. - OCR on ggml (EasyOCR and DocTR) reaches full speed parity with the onnx path, across Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan. PLATFORM AND RELIABILITY - Dynamic compute backends on Linux: one build picks the right backend at runtime, and opens the door to ROCm and CUDA support without per-backend builds. - Thinking tokens are kept out of the model context, so reasoning no longer fills the KV cache. SDK 0.14.0 is now leaner and faster to start. Let’s build.

QVAC

23,995,874 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

The Cost of Intelligence is Heading to Zero | Hyperspace P2P Distributed Cache We present to you our breakthrough cross-domain work across AI, distributed systems, cryptography, game theory to solve the primary structural inefficiency at the heart of AI infrastructure: most inference is redundant. Google has reported that only 15% of daily searches are truly novel. The rest are repeats or close variants. LLM inference inherits this same power-law distribution. Enterprise chatbots see 70-80% of queries fall into a handful of intent categories. System prompts are identical across 100% of requests within an application. The KV attention state for "You are a helpful assistant" has been computed billions of times, on millions of GPUs, identically. And yet every AI lab, every startup, every self-hosted deployment - computes and caches these results independently. There is no shared layer. No global memory. Every provider pays the full compute cost for every query, even when the answer already exists somewhere in the network. This is the problem Hyperspace solves where distributed cache operates at three levels, each catching a different class of redundancy: 1. Response cache Same prompt, same model, same parameters - instant cached response from any node in the network. SHA-256 hash lookup via DHT, with cryptographic cache proofs linking every response to its original inference execution. No trust required. Fetchers re-announce as providers, so popular responses replicate naturally across more nodes. 2. KV prefix cache Same system prompt tokens - skip the most expensive part of inference entirely. Prefill (computing Key-Value attention states) is deterministic: same model plus same tokens always produces identical KV state. The network caches these states using erasure coding and distributes them via the routing network. New questions that share a common prefix resume generation from cached state instead of recomputing from scratch. 3. Routing to cached nodes Instead of transferring KV state across the network for every request, Hyperspace routes the request to the node that already has the state loaded in VRAM. The request goes to the cache, not the cache to the request. Together, these three layers mean that 70-90% of inference requests at network scale never require full GPU computation. This work doesn't exist in isolation. It builds on research from across the industry: SGLang's RadixAttention demonstrated that automatic prefix sharing can yield up to 5x speedup on structured LLM workloads. Moonshot AI's Mooncake built an entire KV-cache-centric disaggregated architecture for production serving at Kimi. Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google all launched prompt caching products in 2024 - priced at 50-90% discounts - because system prompt reuse is so pervasive that it changes the economics of inference. What all of these systems share is a common limitation: they operate within a single organization's infrastructure. SGLang caches prefixes within one server. Mooncake disaggregates KV cache within one datacenter. Anthropic's prompt caching works within one API provider's fleet. None of them can share cached state across organizational boundaries. Hyperspace removes this boundary. The cache is global. A response computed by a node in Tokyo is immediately available to a node in Berlin. A KV prefix state generated for Qwen-32B on one machine is verifiable and reusable by any other machine running the same model. The routing network provides the delivery guarantees, the erasure coding provides the redundancy, and the cache proofs provide the trust. What this means for the cost of intelligence Big AI labs scale linearly: twice the users means twice the GPU spend. Every query is a cost center. Their internal caching helps, but it's siloed - Lab A's cache can't serve Lab B's users, and neither can serve a self-hosted Llama deployment. Hyperspace scales sub-linearly. Every new node that joins the network adds to the global cache. Every inference result enriches the cache for all future requests. The cache hit rate rises with network size because query distributions follow a power law - the most common questions are asked exponentially more often than rare ones. The implication is simple: as the network grows, the effective cost per inference drops. Not linearly. Logarithmically. At 10 million nodes, we estimate 75-90% of all inference requests can be served from cache, eliminating 400,000+ MWh of energy consumption per year and avoiding over 200,000 tons of CO2 emissions. The first person to ask a question pays the compute cost. Everyone after them gets the answer for free, with cryptographic proof that it's authentic. Training is competitive. Inference is shared Open-weight models are converging on quality with closed models. Labs will continue to differentiate on training - data curation, architecture innovation, RLHF tuning. That's where the real intellectual property lives. But inference is a commodity. Two copies of Qwen-32B running the same prompt produce the same KV state and the same response, byte for byte, regardless of whose GPU runs the matrix multiplication. There is no moat in multiplying matrices. The moat is in training the weights. A global distributed cache makes this separation explicit. It doesn't matter who trained the model. Once the weights are open, the inference cost approaches zero at scale - because the network remembers every answer and can prove it's correct. No lab, no matter how well-funded, can match this. They cannot share caches across competitors. They scale linearly. The network scales logarithmically. The marginal cost of intelligence approaches zero. That's the endgame.
0:23

The Cost of Intelligence is Heading to Zero | Hyperspace P2P Distributed Cache We present to you our breakthrough cross-domain work across AI, distributed systems, cryptography, game theory to solve the primary structural inefficiency at the heart of AI infrastructure: most inference is redundant. Google has reported that only 15% of daily searches are truly novel. The rest are repeats or close variants. LLM inference inherits this same power-law distribution. Enterprise chatbots see 70-80% of queries fall into a handful of intent categories. System prompts are identical across 100% of requests within an application. The KV attention state for "You are a helpful assistant" has been computed billions of times, on millions of GPUs, identically. And yet every AI lab, every startup, every self-hosted deployment - computes and caches these results independently. There is no shared layer. No global memory. Every provider pays the full compute cost for every query, even when the answer already exists somewhere in the network. This is the problem Hyperspace solves where distributed cache operates at three levels, each catching a different class of redundancy: 1. Response cache Same prompt, same model, same parameters - instant cached response from any node in the network. SHA-256 hash lookup via DHT, with cryptographic cache proofs linking every response to its original inference execution. No trust required. Fetchers re-announce as providers, so popular responses replicate naturally across more nodes. 2. KV prefix cache Same system prompt tokens - skip the most expensive part of inference entirely. Prefill (computing Key-Value attention states) is deterministic: same model plus same tokens always produces identical KV state. The network caches these states using erasure coding and distributes them via the routing network. New questions that share a common prefix resume generation from cached state instead of recomputing from scratch. 3. Routing to cached nodes Instead of transferring KV state across the network for every request, Hyperspace routes the request to the node that already has the state loaded in VRAM. The request goes to the cache, not the cache to the request. Together, these three layers mean that 70-90% of inference requests at network scale never require full GPU computation. This work doesn't exist in isolation. It builds on research from across the industry: SGLang's RadixAttention demonstrated that automatic prefix sharing can yield up to 5x speedup on structured LLM workloads. Moonshot AI's Mooncake built an entire KV-cache-centric disaggregated architecture for production serving at Kimi. Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google all launched prompt caching products in 2024 - priced at 50-90% discounts - because system prompt reuse is so pervasive that it changes the economics of inference. What all of these systems share is a common limitation: they operate within a single organization's infrastructure. SGLang caches prefixes within one server. Mooncake disaggregates KV cache within one datacenter. Anthropic's prompt caching works within one API provider's fleet. None of them can share cached state across organizational boundaries. Hyperspace removes this boundary. The cache is global. A response computed by a node in Tokyo is immediately available to a node in Berlin. A KV prefix state generated for Qwen-32B on one machine is verifiable and reusable by any other machine running the same model. The routing network provides the delivery guarantees, the erasure coding provides the redundancy, and the cache proofs provide the trust. What this means for the cost of intelligence Big AI labs scale linearly: twice the users means twice the GPU spend. Every query is a cost center. Their internal caching helps, but it's siloed - Lab A's cache can't serve Lab B's users, and neither can serve a self-hosted Llama deployment. Hyperspace scales sub-linearly. Every new node that joins the network adds to the global cache. Every inference result enriches the cache for all future requests. The cache hit rate rises with network size because query distributions follow a power law - the most common questions are asked exponentially more often than rare ones. The implication is simple: as the network grows, the effective cost per inference drops. Not linearly. Logarithmically. At 10 million nodes, we estimate 75-90% of all inference requests can be served from cache, eliminating 400,000+ MWh of energy consumption per year and avoiding over 200,000 tons of CO2 emissions. The first person to ask a question pays the compute cost. Everyone after them gets the answer for free, with cryptographic proof that it's authentic. Training is competitive. Inference is shared Open-weight models are converging on quality with closed models. Labs will continue to differentiate on training - data curation, architecture innovation, RLHF tuning. That's where the real intellectual property lives. But inference is a commodity. Two copies of Qwen-32B running the same prompt produce the same KV state and the same response, byte for byte, regardless of whose GPU runs the matrix multiplication. There is no moat in multiplying matrices. The moat is in training the weights. A global distributed cache makes this separation explicit. It doesn't matter who trained the model. Once the weights are open, the inference cost approaches zero at scale - because the network remembers every answer and can prove it's correct. No lab, no matter how well-funded, can match this. They cannot share caches across competitors. They scale linearly. The network scales logarithmically. The marginal cost of intelligence approaches zero. That's the endgame.

Varun

37,555 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

Soofi Consortium Releases Soofi S 30B-A3B: An Open 31.6B Model for German and English Hitting 79.1 German Aggregate With Only 3.2B Active Parameters. Here's how it works. 👇 1. Sparsity in two places at once 52 layers: 23 Mamba-2, 23 granular MoE, 6 Grouped-Query Attention. The MoE router picks 6 of 128 experts per token, plus 2 shared. Mamba-2 carries the sequence mixing with a fixed-size recurrent state, so 46 of 52 layers keep no KV cache at all. → 3.2B of 31.6B parameters active per token 2. Reference architecture on purpose No bespoke backbone. It adopts NVIDIA's Nemotron 3 Nano design without modification — for day-one vLLM kernels, for serving efficiency, and for scientific control. That last one is the real move: Nemotron becomes an architecture-identical baseline, so the data recipe is the only variable left. 3. German as the deliberate variable Three-phase Warmup–Stable–Decay curriculum. Phase 1 is breadth at a 1e-3 plateau, Phase 2 concentrates high-quality data as the LR decays, Phase 3 stretches context to 1M tokens. → ~26.68T consumed tokens → German 7.2% → 15.32% of the mixture, vs ~5% for all non-English in the Nemotron reference → +4.2 German aggregate, +1.8 English, +6.7 held-out English over Nemotron 4. Where the architecture pays: memory bandwidth Every decoded token re-reads the weights and, for a Transformer, the attention cache of every sequence in the batch. Six KV layers instead of 52 keeps that per-sequence state small. Measured on one B200, TP=1, vLLM latency-subtraction. → 8–9× aggregate decode TPS/GPU vs dense 14–24B models at 40K context, batch 32 → decode stays flat from 4K to 256K 5. The numbers (base model, lm-evaluation-harness, 16 open baselines) → 70.1 English aggregate, +2.8 over Olmo 3 32B → 79.1 German aggregate, +6.3 over Apertus 70B → 73.8 HumanEval, 84.2 MBPP-DE, 88.8 GLP-DE, 61.2 INCLUDE-DE Full analysis: Paper: Technical details:
0:25

Soofi Consortium Releases Soofi S 30B-A3B: An Open 31.6B Model for German and English Hitting 79.1 German Aggregate With Only 3.2B Active Parameters. Here's how it works. 👇 1. Sparsity in two places at once 52 layers: 23 Mamba-2, 23 granular MoE, 6 Grouped-Query Attention. The MoE router picks 6 of 128 experts per token, plus 2 shared. Mamba-2 carries the sequence mixing with a fixed-size recurrent state, so 46 of 52 layers keep no KV cache at all. → 3.2B of 31.6B parameters active per token 2. Reference architecture on purpose No bespoke backbone. It adopts NVIDIA's Nemotron 3 Nano design without modification — for day-one vLLM kernels, for serving efficiency, and for scientific control. That last one is the real move: Nemotron becomes an architecture-identical baseline, so the data recipe is the only variable left. 3. German as the deliberate variable Three-phase Warmup–Stable–Decay curriculum. Phase 1 is breadth at a 1e-3 plateau, Phase 2 concentrates high-quality data as the LR decays, Phase 3 stretches context to 1M tokens. → ~26.68T consumed tokens → German 7.2% → 15.32% of the mixture, vs ~5% for all non-English in the Nemotron reference → +4.2 German aggregate, +1.8 English, +6.7 held-out English over Nemotron 4. Where the architecture pays: memory bandwidth Every decoded token re-reads the weights and, for a Transformer, the attention cache of every sequence in the batch. Six KV layers instead of 52 keeps that per-sequence state small. Measured on one B200, TP=1, vLLM latency-subtraction. → 8–9× aggregate decode TPS/GPU vs dense 14–24B models at 40K context, batch 32 → decode stays flat from 4K to 256K 5. The numbers (base model, lm-evaluation-harness, 16 open baselines) → 70.1 English aggregate, +2.8 over Olmo 3 32B → 79.1 German aggregate, +6.3 over Apertus 70B → 73.8 HumanEval, 84.2 MBPP-DE, 88.8 GLP-DE, 61.2 INCLUDE-DE Full analysis: Paper: Technical details:

Marktechpost AI

65,624 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

I gave a talk at GPU MODE workshop last week on llm.c - the origin story of llm.c - being naked in the world without PyTorch and having to re-invent Array, Autograd, Device, Dtype, Compile, Distributed - how to port a PyTorch layer to 1) explicit PyTorch - and then to 2) write the backward pass - 3) port forward & backward pass to C - 4) string all the layers together - achieving one file of C with no dependencies that compiles and runs ~instantly, where all memory is pre-planned and allocated a single time, fully deterministic, portable code that can run on a potato or a von Neumann probe - how most of llm.c was built at 1am-7am in a water villa porch in Maldives and why this is the recommended way to develop software - convert all of it to run in CUDA on GPU in fp32 - port matmul to cuBLAS - port attention to cuDNN flash-attention - introduce bfloat16 mixed precision - introduce many more optimizations and features like kernel fusions, Packed128, stochastic rounding, full determinism - add multi-GPU training, NCCL, sharded optimizer - add multi-node with MPI or file system or socket - reproduce GPT-2 (1.6B) on one 8XH100 node in 24 hours for $672 in llm.c, achieving (at the time) 29% less memory, 19% faster training that PyTorch nightly, and much faster compile & run - how open source development attracts Avengers from the internet - port to training Llama 3 imminent (branch exists) - many other notable forks - last thought: how software abstractions like Python/PyTorch and everything else really exist only because humans are finite in knowledge, IQ and attention, and how with increasing AI capability LLMs may export custom binaries like llm.c for any application directly, tearing apart and refactoring all abstractions as needed. More links in reply
23:16

I gave a talk at GPU MODE workshop last week on llm.c - the origin story of llm.c - being naked in the world without PyTorch and having to re-invent Array, Autograd, Device, Dtype, Compile, Distributed - how to port a PyTorch layer to 1) explicit PyTorch - and then to 2) write the backward pass - 3) port forward & backward pass to C - 4) string all the layers together - achieving one file of C with no dependencies that compiles and runs ~instantly, where all memory is pre-planned and allocated a single time, fully deterministic, portable code that can run on a potato or a von Neumann probe - how most of llm.c was built at 1am-7am in a water villa porch in Maldives and why this is the recommended way to develop software - convert all of it to run in CUDA on GPU in fp32 - port matmul to cuBLAS - port attention to cuDNN flash-attention - introduce bfloat16 mixed precision - introduce many more optimizations and features like kernel fusions, Packed128, stochastic rounding, full determinism - add multi-GPU training, NCCL, sharded optimizer - add multi-node with MPI or file system or socket - reproduce GPT-2 (1.6B) on one 8XH100 node in 24 hours for $672 in llm.c, achieving (at the time) 29% less memory, 19% faster training that PyTorch nightly, and much faster compile & run - how open source development attracts Avengers from the internet - port to training Llama 3 imminent (branch exists) - many other notable forks - last thought: how software abstractions like Python/PyTorch and everything else really exist only because humans are finite in knowledge, IQ and attention, and how with increasing AI capability LLMs may export custom binaries like llm.c for any application directly, tearing apart and refactoring all abstractions as needed. More links in reply

Andrej Karpathy

337,695 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

NVIDIA just handed every solo creator and freelancer an unfair advantage. Jensen Huang walked on stage and announced RTX Spark. An ARM-based laptop chip that nobody saw coming. They called it the most power efficient PC chip ever built. 20 cores. Blackwell graphics. 6144 CUDA cores. Up to 128GB of LPDDR5X memory. But forget the spec sheet for a second. Here is what actually matters. RTX Spark is built to run AI models locally. No cloud subscription. No API costs. No waiting on a server somewhere. Everything runs directly on the laptop at full speed. That changes the math completely for anyone using AI to make money. The guy generating 3D assets in Blender with Claude his renders now take minutes instead of hours. More projects per day. More income per week. The girl producing AI kids content for YouTube local rendering means no upload wait times, no generation limits, no monthly fees eating into her margins. The freelancer building websites and automating outreach every AI tool in his stack now runs faster and cheaper than before. 30 laptops from Asus, Dell, Lenovo, MSI and others. Available this fall. For years the barrier was hardware. You needed an expensive setup to run serious AI workflows locally. NVIDIA just put that power inside a thin laptop anyone can carry anywhere. The people who already figured out how to monetize AI are about to move twice as fast. The people who haven’t started yet just ran out of excuses. Save this.
0:45

NVIDIA just handed every solo creator and freelancer an unfair advantage. Jensen Huang walked on stage and announced RTX Spark. An ARM-based laptop chip that nobody saw coming. They called it the most power efficient PC chip ever built. 20 cores. Blackwell graphics. 6144 CUDA cores. Up to 128GB of LPDDR5X memory. But forget the spec sheet for a second. Here is what actually matters. RTX Spark is built to run AI models locally. No cloud subscription. No API costs. No waiting on a server somewhere. Everything runs directly on the laptop at full speed. That changes the math completely for anyone using AI to make money. The guy generating 3D assets in Blender with Claude his renders now take minutes instead of hours. More projects per day. More income per week. The girl producing AI kids content for YouTube local rendering means no upload wait times, no generation limits, no monthly fees eating into her margins. The freelancer building websites and automating outreach every AI tool in his stack now runs faster and cheaper than before. 30 laptops from Asus, Dell, Lenovo, MSI and others. Available this fall. For years the barrier was hardware. You needed an expensive setup to run serious AI workflows locally. NVIDIA just put that power inside a thin laptop anyone can carry anywhere. The people who already figured out how to monetize AI are about to move twice as fast. The people who haven’t started yet just ran out of excuses. Save this.

Shelpid.WI3M

27,813 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

In just one week, Binh and I trained a full-body Unitree G1. Here's a recap: 1. Secured a Unitree G1 humanoid through a LinkedIn post 2. Deployed TWIST2 full-body teleoperation pipelines 3. Adapted TWIST2 for Zed stereo camera & collected full-body teleoperation samples (carried by Binh ) 4. Adapted & fine-tuned NVIDIA Gr00T N1.5 VLA on the TWIST2 public datasets, which I fine-tuned on an 8xNVIDIA H100 Cluster. We picked Gr00T N1.5 as it was trained with Unitree G1 embodiment data. 5. Adapted the TWIST2 codebase to stream in the actions from Gr00T via ZMQ using a co-located NVIDIA H100 for ~200ms inference latency 6. Tested the model in sim, then deployed to the real-world Unitree G1. We streamed a training sample observation to the VLA (as we didn't want to break robot in case real observations were OOD) We were the first team in the world to deploy the full TWIST2 data collection pipeline to the unitree g1 :) Much more work ahead though, which I'll work on as a side-project over the next months: 1. Exploring the various types of 'world models': video backbones, dynamics models, v-jepa-2 models. I believe these will generalize better & train much more data-efficiently than VLM backbones 2. Speeding up inference - I believe low-latency robotics inference will be a big challenge. There are many works in video diffusion which I'd like to test (e.g. SageAttention, SparseAttention, Drifting Models). Perhaps also writing custom CUDA kernels. 3. Economics of inference scaling :) What will be the compute demands as we scale inference up to millions of humanoids? Will it run on edge or on distributed 'co-located' inference clusters? These are questions I'd like to answer. Adapted TWIST2 codebase: Adapted Gr00T-N1.5 codebase: The ETH Robotics Club are doing a cool GTC Golden ticket competition with NVIDIA , so this is my submission :) The DGX Spark compute will get me a long way with initial prototyping & especially working on inference optimization for next-gen Blackwell GPUs #NVIDIAGTC #GOLDENTICKET #ETHRC
0:45

In just one week, Binh and I trained a full-body Unitree G1. Here's a recap: 1. Secured a Unitree G1 humanoid through a LinkedIn post 2. Deployed TWIST2 full-body teleoperation pipelines 3. Adapted TWIST2 for Zed stereo camera & collected full-body teleoperation samples (carried by Binh ) 4. Adapted & fine-tuned NVIDIA Gr00T N1.5 VLA on the TWIST2 public datasets, which I fine-tuned on an 8xNVIDIA H100 Cluster. We picked Gr00T N1.5 as it was trained with Unitree G1 embodiment data. 5. Adapted the TWIST2 codebase to stream in the actions from Gr00T via ZMQ using a co-located NVIDIA H100 for ~200ms inference latency 6. Tested the model in sim, then deployed to the real-world Unitree G1. We streamed a training sample observation to the VLA (as we didn't want to break robot in case real observations were OOD) We were the first team in the world to deploy the full TWIST2 data collection pipeline to the unitree g1 :) Much more work ahead though, which I'll work on as a side-project over the next months: 1. Exploring the various types of 'world models': video backbones, dynamics models, v-jepa-2 models. I believe these will generalize better & train much more data-efficiently than VLM backbones 2. Speeding up inference - I believe low-latency robotics inference will be a big challenge. There are many works in video diffusion which I'd like to test (e.g. SageAttention, SparseAttention, Drifting Models). Perhaps also writing custom CUDA kernels. 3. Economics of inference scaling :) What will be the compute demands as we scale inference up to millions of humanoids? Will it run on edge or on distributed 'co-located' inference clusters? These are questions I'd like to answer. Adapted TWIST2 codebase: Adapted Gr00T-N1.5 codebase: The ETH Robotics Club are doing a cool GTC Golden ticket competition with NVIDIA , so this is my submission :) The DGX Spark compute will get me a long way with initial prototyping & especially working on inference optimization for next-gen Blackwell GPUs #NVIDIAGTC #GOLDENTICKET #ETHRC

Arnie Ramesh

23,236 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

New interview: Reiner Pope, co-founder/CEO of MatX A counterintuitive throughput insight: “Low latency means small batch sizes. That is just Little’s law. Memory occupancy in HBM is proportional to batch size. So you can actually fit longer contexts than you could if the latency were larger. Low latency is not just a usability win, it improves throughput.” We get into: • The hybrid SRAM + HBM bet, and why pipeline parallelism finally works • Why sparse MoE drives MatX to “the most interconnect of any announced product” • Why frontier labs are willing to bet on an AI ASIC startup • Memory-bandwidth-efficient attention, numerics, and what MatX publishes (and what it does not) • Why 95% of model-side news is noise for chip design • The biggest challenges ahead 00:00 “We left Google one week before ChatGPT” 00:24 Intro: who is MatX 01:17 Origin story: leaving Google for LLM chips 02:21 GPT-3 and the “too expensive” problem 04:25 Why buy hardware that is not a GPU 05:52 Overcoming the CUDA moat 08:46 Early investors 09:35 The name MatX 09:59 The chip: matrix multiply + hybrid SRAM/HBM 12:11 Why pipeline parallelism finally works 14:22 Reading papers and Google going dark 15:20 Research agenda: attention and numerics 17:06 Five specs and meeting customers where they are 19:24 Why frontier labs are the natural first customer 20:32 Workloads: training, prefill, decode 22:18 Little’s law and the throughput case for low latency 24:29 Interconnect and MoE topology 26:35 Inside the team: 100 people, full stack 28:32 Agentic AI: 95% noise for hardware 30:35 KV cache sizing in an agentic world 32:11 How MatX uses AI for chip design (Verilog + BlueSpec) 34:23 Go to market: proving credibility under NDA 35:12 Porting effort for frontier labs 36:34 Biggest skepticism: manufacturing at gigawatt scale 37:32 Hiring plug Vikram Sekar
38:57

New interview: Reiner Pope, co-founder/CEO of MatX A counterintuitive throughput insight: “Low latency means small batch sizes. That is just Little’s law. Memory occupancy in HBM is proportional to batch size. So you can actually fit longer contexts than you could if the latency were larger. Low latency is not just a usability win, it improves throughput.” We get into: • The hybrid SRAM + HBM bet, and why pipeline parallelism finally works • Why sparse MoE drives MatX to “the most interconnect of any announced product” • Why frontier labs are willing to bet on an AI ASIC startup • Memory-bandwidth-efficient attention, numerics, and what MatX publishes (and what it does not) • Why 95% of model-side news is noise for chip design • The biggest challenges ahead 00:00 “We left Google one week before ChatGPT” 00:24 Intro: who is MatX 01:17 Origin story: leaving Google for LLM chips 02:21 GPT-3 and the “too expensive” problem 04:25 Why buy hardware that is not a GPU 05:52 Overcoming the CUDA moat 08:46 Early investors 09:35 The name MatX 09:59 The chip: matrix multiply + hybrid SRAM/HBM 12:11 Why pipeline parallelism finally works 14:22 Reading papers and Google going dark 15:20 Research agenda: attention and numerics 17:06 Five specs and meeting customers where they are 19:24 Why frontier labs are the natural first customer 20:32 Workloads: training, prefill, decode 22:18 Little’s law and the throughput case for low latency 24:29 Interconnect and MoE topology 26:35 Inside the team: 100 people, full stack 28:32 Agentic AI: 95% noise for hardware 30:35 KV cache sizing in an agentic world 32:11 How MatX uses AI for chip design (Verilog + BlueSpec) 34:23 Go to market: proving credibility under NDA 35:12 Porting effort for frontier labs 36:34 Biggest skepticism: manufacturing at gigawatt scale 37:32 Hiring plug Vikram Sekar

Semi Doped

19,814 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

🚀 Sol-H3: MiniMax (official) H3 Video Generation Faster Than Playback 🤩 Five seconds of world. 1.653 seconds to infer. We’re releasing Sol-H3, our fastest end-to-end MiniMax-H3 inference stack yet. On one 8× NVIDIA B300 Blackwell system, it generates five seconds of 1344×768 video with stereo audio in 1.653 seconds. Across 1×, 4×, and 8× B300, Sol-H3 reaches up to a 15.54× speedup versus Base H3. Compared with 50-step Base H3 Dense on the same 8× B300 system, the four-step Sol-H3 profile delivers: • 5s: 18.250s → 1.653s (11.04×) • 10s: 50.660s → 3.732s (13.57×) • 15s: 99.513s → 6.612s (15.05×) Sol-H3 also scales across GPU counts: • 4× B300: 2.918s / 6.993s / 12.542s for 5s / 10s / 15s (12.11–15.54×) • 1× B300: 13.745s / 37.813s / 52.260s for 5s / 10s / 15s (9.45–14.29×) All figures are medians of three measured runs after one warmup at 1344×768 and 24 FPS with stereo audio. Base H3 uses 50 scheduler points (49 DiT forwards); Sol-H3 uses four DiT forwards, so this is a full-profile comparison—not an attention-only runtime change. Sol-H3 uses Dense attention on 1× B300 and SOL with INT8 QKV / FP8 output transport on 4× / 8×. Timing includes text encoding, DiT denoising, and video/audio VAE decoding; model loading, compilation warmup, and final MP4 encoding are excluded. Sol-H3 brings Sol-Engine × Sol-Attn into one full-stack runtime: • dynamic sparse attention with no retraining • fused norm, RoPE, MLP, and sparse-attention setup • fused INT8 QKV / FP8 output communication across 8 GPUs • parallel, batched VAE decoding • precomputed AdaLN caching Inside the stack: • sparse-attention setup: 1.206 → 0.285 ms (−76.4%) • VAE decode: 7.55 → 0.602 s • ~24 GB memory freed per GPU Any MiniMax-H3 few-step LoRA can plug into the same engine, and the code is deployment-friendly under Apache 2.0. For us, the bigger milestone is crossing from “fast generation” into “faster than playback.” That opens the path toward continuous 24 FPS generation and truly interactive video systems. We’re excited to partner with reactor to release Sol-H3 and make it available as an API day-0. Try it now on Reactor: 🔗 Amazing team effort—full credits in the blog. LoveSy Junsong_Chen yitong li Haopeng Li Haocheng Xi Song Han
0:33

🚀 Sol-H3: MiniMax (official) H3 Video Generation Faster Than Playback 🤩 Five seconds of world. 1.653 seconds to infer. We’re releasing Sol-H3, our fastest end-to-end MiniMax-H3 inference stack yet. On one 8× NVIDIA B300 Blackwell system, it generates five seconds of 1344×768 video with stereo audio in 1.653 seconds. Across 1×, 4×, and 8× B300, Sol-H3 reaches up to a 15.54× speedup versus Base H3. Compared with 50-step Base H3 Dense on the same 8× B300 system, the four-step Sol-H3 profile delivers: • 5s: 18.250s → 1.653s (11.04×) • 10s: 50.660s → 3.732s (13.57×) • 15s: 99.513s → 6.612s (15.05×) Sol-H3 also scales across GPU counts: • 4× B300: 2.918s / 6.993s / 12.542s for 5s / 10s / 15s (12.11–15.54×) • 1× B300: 13.745s / 37.813s / 52.260s for 5s / 10s / 15s (9.45–14.29×) All figures are medians of three measured runs after one warmup at 1344×768 and 24 FPS with stereo audio. Base H3 uses 50 scheduler points (49 DiT forwards); Sol-H3 uses four DiT forwards, so this is a full-profile comparison—not an attention-only runtime change. Sol-H3 uses Dense attention on 1× B300 and SOL with INT8 QKV / FP8 output transport on 4× / 8×. Timing includes text encoding, DiT denoising, and video/audio VAE decoding; model loading, compilation warmup, and final MP4 encoding are excluded. Sol-H3 brings Sol-Engine × Sol-Attn into one full-stack runtime: • dynamic sparse attention with no retraining • fused norm, RoPE, MLP, and sparse-attention setup • fused INT8 QKV / FP8 output communication across 8 GPUs • parallel, batched VAE decoding • precomputed AdaLN caching Inside the stack: • sparse-attention setup: 1.206 → 0.285 ms (−76.4%) • VAE decode: 7.55 → 0.602 s • ~24 GB memory freed per GPU Any MiniMax-H3 few-step LoRA can plug into the same engine, and the code is deployment-friendly under Apache 2.0. For us, the bigger milestone is crossing from “fast generation” into “faster than playback.” That opens the path toward continuous 24 FPS generation and truly interactive video systems. We’re excited to partner with reactor to release Sol-H3 and make it available as an API day-0. Try it now on Reactor: 🔗 Amazing team effort—full credits in the blog. LoveSy Junsong_Chen yitong li Haopeng Li Haocheng Xi Song Han

Enze Xie

198,721 görüntüleme • 5 gün önce

EP-355 with Sudhir Chaudhary premieres today at 5 PM IST “No one pays anyone a single rupee without knowing their market value.” Sudhir Chaudhary on being called the highest-paid government employee “The TRP system has single-handedly destroyed journalism.” Sudhir Chaudhary “I apologised the next day, mistakes happen during live news.” Sudhir Chaudhary on the ‘nano chip’ controversy “All the courts have given me a clean chit.” Sudhir Chaudhary on the alleged extortion case “I don’t know how you found out about it…” Sudhir Chaudhary on making a film #ANIPodcast #SmitaPrakash #SudhirChaudhary #Decode #DD #News #Media Tap 'notify me' to get episode alerts:
2:17

EP-355 with Sudhir Chaudhary premieres today at 5 PM IST “No one pays anyone a single rupee without knowing their market value.” Sudhir Chaudhary on being called the highest-paid government employee “The TRP system has single-handedly destroyed journalism.” Sudhir Chaudhary “I apologised the next day, mistakes happen during live news.” Sudhir Chaudhary on the ‘nano chip’ controversy “All the courts have given me a clean chit.” Sudhir Chaudhary on the alleged extortion case “I don’t know how you found out about it…” Sudhir Chaudhary on making a film #ANIPodcast #SmitaPrakash #SudhirChaudhary #Decode #DD #News #Media Tap 'notify me' to get episode alerts:

ANI

178,864 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce