Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

We asked James Wang why Cerebras can run large models so quickly. His answer: Inference speed is mostly a memory problem. Instead of constantly pulling weights from external memory, Cerebras splits the model across multiple wafers and pipelines the layers together. “Inference is all about memory bandwidth.” “You don’t...

MTSlive's profile picture

MTS

212,995 subscribers

27,935 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Cerebras raised $5.55 billion in their IPO and closing their first day of trading valued at $66 billion, making it the biggest US tech IPO since Snowflake in 2020. Cerebras makes Wafer-Scale Engine chips built for AI inference. We asked Sarah Fong the main difference between wafer-scale chips and traditional GPUs: - GPUs are great at parallel work (graphics, training) - AI inference is sequential, AKA one token at a time This causes the "memory wall" problem: - Every GPU core needs model weights, KV cache, and activations to do its math - On a GPU, that data lives in off-chip memory (HBM) - Cores constantly load and offload from off-chip memory, which is a huge bottleneck; hardware accounts for ~70% of inference latency Cerebras' chips: -Dinner-plate sized (vs. GPUs which are palm-sized) with tens of thousands of cores -Memory sits directly on top of the cores as distributed SRAM -Weights and KV cache can be accessed at on-chip speeds in the PB/s range, compared with off-chip speeds in the TB/s range achieved by GPUs with HBM.
3:14

SITUATION EXPLAINED: Cerebras raised $5.55 billion in their IPO and closing their first day of trading valued at $66 billion, making it the biggest US tech IPO since Snowflake in 2020. Cerebras makes Wafer-Scale Engine chips built for AI inference. We asked Sarah Fong the main difference between wafer-scale chips and traditional GPUs: - GPUs are great at parallel work (graphics, training) - AI inference is sequential, AKA one token at a time This causes the "memory wall" problem: - Every GPU core needs model weights, KV cache, and activations to do its math - On a GPU, that data lives in off-chip memory (HBM) - Cores constantly load and offload from off-chip memory, which is a huge bottleneck; hardware accounts for ~70% of inference latency Cerebras' chips: -Dinner-plate sized (vs. GPUs which are palm-sized) with tens of thousands of cores -Memory sits directly on top of the cores as distributed SRAM -Weights and KV cache can be accessed at on-chip speeds in the PB/s range, compared with off-chip speeds in the TB/s range achieved by GPUs with HBM.

MTS

44,057 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Cerebras just IPO’d and the stock already ran up over 100% (Save this). For the entire 70 year history of the semiconductor industry, every company on earth has followed the same process. You take a dinner plate sized silicon wafer, put hundreds of tiny chips onto it, and dice it up like a pizza. Nvidia does it this way, AMD does it this way, Intel has done it this way for six decades and everyone who tried to break that convention failed. Until Cerebras asked the most annoyingly obvious question in the industry’s history, what if you just didn’t cut it? The result is the Wafer Scale Engine, a single chip 56 times larger than Nvidia’s H100 and it fundamentally changes the physics of how AI inference works. The reason this matters is not the size, it’s the bandwidth. Every time an AI model generates a single word, it has to reach into memory, pull weights, multiply them together, and produce a prediction and when you’re running millions of concurrent sessions at once, the bottleneck is not raw processing power but how fast data moves between memory and compute. Nvidia’s H100 moves data at roughly 3 terabytes per second, while Cerebras’ WSE-3 moves data at 21 petabytes per second, roughly 7,000 times faster because memory and compute live on the same enormous piece of silicon and data barely has to travel at all. That gap is exactly why OpenAI went from 150 tokens per second on traditional GPUs to 2,000 tokens per second on Cerebras hardware, and why AWS integrated Cerebras into Bedrock to deliver roughly 5x more inference capacity in the same physical footprint. The macro setup is making the trade even more urgent. South Korea DRAM export prices recently jumped 35%, flash memory surged 47%, and SSD pricing spiked nearly 140% and every single one of those increases hits Nvidia-based infrastructure directly, because the H100 requires 80GB of the most expensive, most contested memory in the AI supply chain. Cerebras’ WSE-3 uses zero external HBM memory, baking 44GB of SRAM directly into the wafer itself which means as memory pricing goes parabolic, every CFO evaluating AI infrastructure is suddenly looking much more seriously at the architecture that sidesteps that cost entirely. The demand is already showing up in the backlog. Cerebras ended 2025 with $24.6 billion in remaining performance obligations for a company doing just over $500 million in annual revenue, that is a number that implies years of contracted growth already sitting on the books. The IPO was 20x oversubscribed, the price range was raised twice before listing, and shares opened 89% above their listing price on a $5.55 billion raise that made it the largest semiconductor IPO in history. The risks are real and worth naming. 86% of 2025 revenue came from two entities with UAE ties, U.S. revenue actually fell 34% to $187 million, and the $20 billion OpenAI contract is conditional, if Cerebras misses delivery milestones, OpenAI can terminate and trigger repayment demands on a $1 billion loan facility. And yet the market is valuing Cerebras at roughly 91x trailing revenue, richer than Nvidia, AMD, and Arm combined. What investors are betting on is not that Cerebras beats Nvidia, it is that the inference supercycle is large enough to support an entirely different architecture optimized for a different workload, and that $24.6 billion in contracted backlog converts to diversified revenue before the market starts asking harder questions. CEO Andrew Feldman said this took a decade of late nights to get right, everyone who tried to copy it failed and given that the entire inference economy is now running through exactly the bottleneck Cerebras was built to eliminate, the market is starting to believe him.
2:04

Cerebras just IPO’d and the stock already ran up over 100% (Save this). For the entire 70 year history of the semiconductor industry, every company on earth has followed the same process. You take a dinner plate sized silicon wafer, put hundreds of tiny chips onto it, and dice it up like a pizza. Nvidia does it this way, AMD does it this way, Intel has done it this way for six decades and everyone who tried to break that convention failed. Until Cerebras asked the most annoyingly obvious question in the industry’s history, what if you just didn’t cut it? The result is the Wafer Scale Engine, a single chip 56 times larger than Nvidia’s H100 and it fundamentally changes the physics of how AI inference works. The reason this matters is not the size, it’s the bandwidth. Every time an AI model generates a single word, it has to reach into memory, pull weights, multiply them together, and produce a prediction and when you’re running millions of concurrent sessions at once, the bottleneck is not raw processing power but how fast data moves between memory and compute. Nvidia’s H100 moves data at roughly 3 terabytes per second, while Cerebras’ WSE-3 moves data at 21 petabytes per second, roughly 7,000 times faster because memory and compute live on the same enormous piece of silicon and data barely has to travel at all. That gap is exactly why OpenAI went from 150 tokens per second on traditional GPUs to 2,000 tokens per second on Cerebras hardware, and why AWS integrated Cerebras into Bedrock to deliver roughly 5x more inference capacity in the same physical footprint. The macro setup is making the trade even more urgent. South Korea DRAM export prices recently jumped 35%, flash memory surged 47%, and SSD pricing spiked nearly 140% and every single one of those increases hits Nvidia-based infrastructure directly, because the H100 requires 80GB of the most expensive, most contested memory in the AI supply chain. Cerebras’ WSE-3 uses zero external HBM memory, baking 44GB of SRAM directly into the wafer itself which means as memory pricing goes parabolic, every CFO evaluating AI infrastructure is suddenly looking much more seriously at the architecture that sidesteps that cost entirely. The demand is already showing up in the backlog. Cerebras ended 2025 with $24.6 billion in remaining performance obligations for a company doing just over $500 million in annual revenue, that is a number that implies years of contracted growth already sitting on the books. The IPO was 20x oversubscribed, the price range was raised twice before listing, and shares opened 89% above their listing price on a $5.55 billion raise that made it the largest semiconductor IPO in history. The risks are real and worth naming. 86% of 2025 revenue came from two entities with UAE ties, U.S. revenue actually fell 34% to $187 million, and the $20 billion OpenAI contract is conditional, if Cerebras misses delivery milestones, OpenAI can terminate and trigger repayment demands on a $1 billion loan facility. And yet the market is valuing Cerebras at roughly 91x trailing revenue, richer than Nvidia, AMD, and Arm combined. What investors are betting on is not that Cerebras beats Nvidia, it is that the inference supercycle is large enough to support an entirely different architecture optimized for a different workload, and that $24.6 billion in contracted backlog converts to diversified revenue before the market starts asking harder questions. CEO Andrew Feldman said this took a decade of late nights to get right, everyone who tried to copy it failed and given that the entire inference economy is now running through exactly the bottleneck Cerebras was built to eliminate, the market is starting to believe him.

Milk Road AI

30,441 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Micron is going to $4,000 and once you understand what inference actually is, the number stops sounding crazy (Save this). Dylan Patel just said that by 2030, OpenAI and Anthropic alone will need over 100 gigawatts of compute combined and by 2040, we may not even be measuring AI infrastructure in gigawatts anymore. We may be talking about terawatts. Every single one of those gigawatts needs memory to function. Without it, the compute is worthless. Most people heard that and thought about Nvidia but they should be thinking about Micron. Every AI model generating a response has two phases. The first is prefill, processing your prompt which is compute-heavy and the second is decode generating each word one token at a time and that phase is almost entirely memory-bound, not compute-bound. During decode, the GPU's processing units sit idle more than 95% of the time, waiting for data to arrive from memory. Google confirmed it in a research paper that decode-phase bottlenecks are dominated by memory bandwidth and capacity not raw compute. The GPU is not the bottleneck but the memory feeding the GPU is. This matters because inference is now where all the money lives. Training a model happens once, Inference happens billions of times a day every ChatGPT response, every Claude output, every agentic workflow running in the background and every one of those token streams is a billing event tied directly to memory performance. Adding more GPUs does not fix this because GPUs are already underutilized in inference because they are sitting idle waiting on memory. Adding more memory bandwidth and capacity is what directly reduces token cost, reduces latency, and allows the same cluster to serve dramatically more users simultaneously. Longer context windows compound the problem further, a model running a 1 million token context window requires dramatically more memory per session than a 10,000 token window, and every new model generation pushes context longer. The market treats memory as a downstream beneficiary of Nvidia orders. The correct framework is the opposite, Micron is the upstream constraint on how much value every Nvidia GPU can actually generate at inference scale. Micron guided Q4 to $50 billion in revenue, has HBM4 ramping at twice the pace of the prior generation, and CEO Sanjay Mehrotra has said supply will not catch demand before the end of 2027. At 8x forward earnings on $112 projected FY2027 EPS, Micron is the most undervalued infrastructure company in the entire AI stack. Inference is memory. Memory is Micron and the inference ramp has barely started. Milk Road Pro members are already up massively on this position and we're just getting started. If you want the full breakdown of what we're buying and why, come join us for just a dollar using the link below!
0:39

Micron is going to $4,000 and once you understand what inference actually is, the number stops sounding crazy (Save this). Dylan Patel just said that by 2030, OpenAI and Anthropic alone will need over 100 gigawatts of compute combined and by 2040, we may not even be measuring AI infrastructure in gigawatts anymore. We may be talking about terawatts. Every single one of those gigawatts needs memory to function. Without it, the compute is worthless. Most people heard that and thought about Nvidia but they should be thinking about Micron. Every AI model generating a response has two phases. The first is prefill, processing your prompt which is compute-heavy and the second is decode generating each word one token at a time and that phase is almost entirely memory-bound, not compute-bound. During decode, the GPU's processing units sit idle more than 95% of the time, waiting for data to arrive from memory. Google confirmed it in a research paper that decode-phase bottlenecks are dominated by memory bandwidth and capacity not raw compute. The GPU is not the bottleneck but the memory feeding the GPU is. This matters because inference is now where all the money lives. Training a model happens once, Inference happens billions of times a day every ChatGPT response, every Claude output, every agentic workflow running in the background and every one of those token streams is a billing event tied directly to memory performance. Adding more GPUs does not fix this because GPUs are already underutilized in inference because they are sitting idle waiting on memory. Adding more memory bandwidth and capacity is what directly reduces token cost, reduces latency, and allows the same cluster to serve dramatically more users simultaneously. Longer context windows compound the problem further, a model running a 1 million token context window requires dramatically more memory per session than a 10,000 token window, and every new model generation pushes context longer. The market treats memory as a downstream beneficiary of Nvidia orders. The correct framework is the opposite, Micron is the upstream constraint on how much value every Nvidia GPU can actually generate at inference scale. Micron guided Q4 to $50 billion in revenue, has HBM4 ramping at twice the pace of the prior generation, and CEO Sanjay Mehrotra has said supply will not catch demand before the end of 2027. At 8x forward earnings on $112 projected FY2027 EPS, Micron is the most undervalued infrastructure company in the entire AI stack. Inference is memory. Memory is Micron and the inference ramp has barely started. Milk Road Pro members are already up massively on this position and we're just getting started. If you want the full breakdown of what we're buying and why, come join us for just a dollar using the link below!

Milk Road AI

128,678 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Cognition President Russell Kaplan reveals the Cerebras chips they deployed ran their own models so fast at about 950 tokens per second that the team was confused by the test results, and it enabled them to ship a product experience that wouldn't have been possible otherwise. "One thing that was really fun working on SWE is we were the first kind of Western firm to deploy Cerebras at scale. You know, when we tested their chips, we were really confused because we were like, this is really good. You know, it operates a unique point on the Pareto curve of price and throughput." "And, you know, we were getting about 950 tokens per second on our own models, which was many x faster than what we could get on GPUs for the same size of model. And it was a little bit more expensive for us to serve. They were great partners, and they enabled us to ship a product experience that basically wouldn't have been possible otherwise." "And now Cerebras is more popular. You know, now, you know, OpenAI also uses Cerebras for Spark. I think more people are considering them. But we want to constantly be basically pushing the frontier of, well, what's the next most possible thing that wasn't possible previously? And yeah, doing our own RL and post-training helps with that."
0:52

Cognition President Russell Kaplan reveals the Cerebras chips they deployed ran their own models so fast at about 950 tokens per second that the team was confused by the test results, and it enabled them to ship a product experience that wouldn't have been possible otherwise. "One thing that was really fun working on SWE is we were the first kind of Western firm to deploy Cerebras at scale. You know, when we tested their chips, we were really confused because we were like, this is really good. You know, it operates a unique point on the Pareto curve of price and throughput." "And, you know, we were getting about 950 tokens per second on our own models, which was many x faster than what we could get on GPUs for the same size of model. And it was a little bit more expensive for us to serve. They were great partners, and they enabled us to ship a product experience that basically wouldn't have been possible otherwise." "And now Cerebras is more popular. You know, now, you know, OpenAI also uses Cerebras for Spark. I think more people are considering them. But we want to constantly be basically pushing the frontier of, well, what's the next most possible thing that wasn't possible previously? And yeah, doing our own RL and post-training helps with that."

Fireside Alpha

22,118 Aufrufe • vor 29 Tagen

Etched is deploying two new technologies in chip design: low-voltage inference and cluster-scale memory. CEO Gavin Uberti says they'll make their chips much more power-efficient and way, way faster than today's leading GPUs. He breaks it down: "We looked at a lot of early research directions, and we realized the key things that models need are way more compute and way faster memory." "If you think about inference, there are two key parts: prefill and decode. For prefill, it's a compute-bound problem. You need to have more FLOPS, more operations per second on each of your chips." "On our GPU, the bottleneck's actually thermals. You can't really run a GPU at more than around 50% of what it could theoretically do, or it'll melt." "So we're using a new technology today called low-voltage inference to try to solve this problem. You bring the voltage of the chip down dramatically, which allows us to have way, way better efficiency in terms of how much power is drawn per unit of math, and thus fit way way more flops onto the chip..." "For decode, it's all about bandwidth. Not just bandwidth on a chip, but bandwidth across your cluster. That's why we have this technology we call cluster-scale memory. It reduces the amount of time it takes to communicate from one chip to another dramatically." "As a result we can go use all of our HBM, HBM bandwidth, SRAM, SRAM bandwidth, and our scale-up domain as a single coherent pool. And that means if you're a user, you can go get much faster tokens per second, while still keeping your costs low."
3:19

Etched is deploying two new technologies in chip design: low-voltage inference and cluster-scale memory. CEO Gavin Uberti says they'll make their chips much more power-efficient and way, way faster than today's leading GPUs. He breaks it down: "We looked at a lot of early research directions, and we realized the key things that models need are way more compute and way faster memory." "If you think about inference, there are two key parts: prefill and decode. For prefill, it's a compute-bound problem. You need to have more FLOPS, more operations per second on each of your chips." "On our GPU, the bottleneck's actually thermals. You can't really run a GPU at more than around 50% of what it could theoretically do, or it'll melt." "So we're using a new technology today called low-voltage inference to try to solve this problem. You bring the voltage of the chip down dramatically, which allows us to have way, way better efficiency in terms of how much power is drawn per unit of math, and thus fit way way more flops onto the chip..." "For decode, it's all about bandwidth. Not just bandwidth on a chip, but bandwidth across your cluster. That's why we have this technology we call cluster-scale memory. It reduces the amount of time it takes to communicate from one chip to another dramatically." "As a result we can go use all of our HBM, HBM bandwidth, SRAM, SRAM bandwidth, and our scale-up domain as a single coherent pool. And that means if you're a user, you can go get much faster tokens per second, while still keeping your costs low."

TBPN

20,404 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

NVIDIA sent us 2 DGX Sparks. For a while we wondered what we would do with them. The memory bandwidth is 273GB/s making it 3x slower than an M3 Ultra (819GB/s) for batch_size=1 inference. But it has 4x more FLOPS (100 TFLOPS compared to 26 TFLOPS). So we thought, what if we could combine the DGX Spark & M3 Ultra, and make use of both the massive compute on the DGX Spark and the massive memory-bandwidth on the M3 Ultra. We came up with a way to split inference across both devices and achieve a speedup of up to 4x for long prompts compared to the M3 Ultra on its own. Full details in the blog post linked below.
1:13

NVIDIA sent us 2 DGX Sparks. For a while we wondered what we would do with them. The memory bandwidth is 273GB/s making it 3x slower than an M3 Ultra (819GB/s) for batch_size=1 inference. But it has 4x more FLOPS (100 TFLOPS compared to 26 TFLOPS). So we thought, what if we could combine the DGX Spark & M3 Ultra, and make use of both the massive compute on the DGX Spark and the massive memory-bandwidth on the M3 Ultra. We came up with a way to split inference across both devices and achieve a speedup of up to 4x for long prompts compared to the M3 Ultra on its own. Full details in the blog post linked below.

Alex Cheema

281,225 Aufrufe • vor 10 Monaten

The creator of High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) put a number on the AI build that should stop every infra investor cold. A cluster of a million GPUs runs at roughly 10-20% utilization (Save this). Kim Jung-ho spent thirty years building what feeds the GPU, and his claim is that the GPU is barely working. Here is what is actually happening. Every time a model generates output, the data has to be read out of memory, computed, and written back. The read and the write swallow almost the entire cycle. While that data moves, the GPU does nothing. It sits there, fully powered, fully paid for, waiting. By Kim's estimate the memory is doing only about 30 percent of the work it needs to do. The processor idles the rest. So a million installed GPUs run at 10 to 20 percent. You are not compute constrained. You are memory constrained, and the expensive part is standing around. Adding more GPUs does not fix this. It gives you more processors starving for the same data. Here is the part that decides the next decade. Memory can grow. When a cell cannot shrink any further, you stack it into a high-rise, layer on layer. A GPU cannot be stacked. It runs too hot and needs a cooler bolted to its back, so the one move that rescues memory is closed to the processor. The thing that can keep stacking compounds. The thing that cannot plateaus. The marginal dollar in an AI build now buys more by fixing the memory path than by bolting on another idle GPU. Which is why the companies that control memory bandwidth and supply are not suppliers to the AI trade. They are the AI trade.
0:50

The creator of High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) put a number on the AI build that should stop every infra investor cold. A cluster of a million GPUs runs at roughly 10-20% utilization (Save this). Kim Jung-ho spent thirty years building what feeds the GPU, and his claim is that the GPU is barely working. Here is what is actually happening. Every time a model generates output, the data has to be read out of memory, computed, and written back. The read and the write swallow almost the entire cycle. While that data moves, the GPU does nothing. It sits there, fully powered, fully paid for, waiting. By Kim's estimate the memory is doing only about 30 percent of the work it needs to do. The processor idles the rest. So a million installed GPUs run at 10 to 20 percent. You are not compute constrained. You are memory constrained, and the expensive part is standing around. Adding more GPUs does not fix this. It gives you more processors starving for the same data. Here is the part that decides the next decade. Memory can grow. When a cell cannot shrink any further, you stack it into a high-rise, layer on layer. A GPU cannot be stacked. It runs too hot and needs a cooler bolted to its back, so the one move that rescues memory is closed to the processor. The thing that can keep stacking compounds. The thing that cannot plateaus. The marginal dollar in an AI build now buys more by fixing the memory path than by bolting on another idle GPU. Which is why the companies that control memory bandwidth and supply are not suppliers to the AI trade. They are the AI trade.

Fireside Alpha

38,370 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

SK Hynix's Hoshik Kim admits high bandwidth memory "is not the answer" to the memory-wall problem, and SK is working on different solutions to solve the bottleneck. "No, actually, I kind of agree with Pat. So HBM is not the answer." [SK Hynix is admitting that HBM is a bad memory?] "Nothing is a bad memory. It's a good memory, but it's not the final answer. So actually, HBM will not solve the memory-wall problem. Memory-wall problem is an inherent AI problem, which you cannot avoid." "So we try our best to provide higher bandwidth with this memory, with HBM technology even though it has some limitation, as Pat already mentioned, with thermal, IOs, cost, a lot of stuff. "But that's the only thing we got right now to help ease this memory-wall problem, memory-bottleneck problem. But at the same time, we are working in different directions to solve this memory-wall problem with different solutions."
0:51

SK Hynix's Hoshik Kim admits high bandwidth memory "is not the answer" to the memory-wall problem, and SK is working on different solutions to solve the bottleneck. "No, actually, I kind of agree with Pat. So HBM is not the answer." [SK Hynix is admitting that HBM is a bad memory?] "Nothing is a bad memory. It's a good memory, but it's not the final answer. So actually, HBM will not solve the memory-wall problem. Memory-wall problem is an inherent AI problem, which you cannot avoid." "So we try our best to provide higher bandwidth with this memory, with HBM technology even though it has some limitation, as Pat already mentioned, with thermal, IOs, cost, a lot of stuff. "But that's the only thing we got right now to help ease this memory-wall problem, memory-bottleneck problem. But at the same time, we are working in different directions to solve this memory-wall problem with different solutions."

Fireside Alpha

140,571 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

New course: Agent Memory: Building Memory-Aware Agents, built in partnership with Oracle and taught by Richmond Alake and Nacho Martínez. Many agents work well within a single session but their memory resets once the session ends. Consider a research agent working on dozens of papers across multiple days: without memory, it has no way to store and retrieve what it learned across sessions. This short course teaches you to build a memory system that enables agents to persist memory and thereby learn across sessions. You'll design a Memory Manager that handles different memory types, implement semantic tool retrieval that scales without bloating the context, and build write-back pipelines that let your agent autonomously update and refine what it knows over time. Skills you'll gain: - Build persistent memory stores for different agent memory types - Implement a Memory Manager that orchestrates how your agent reads, writes, and retrieves memory - Treat tools as procedural memory and retrieve only relevant ones at inference time using semantic search Join and learn to build agents that remember and improve over time!
1:37

New course: Agent Memory: Building Memory-Aware Agents, built in partnership with Oracle and taught by Richmond Alake and Nacho Martínez. Many agents work well within a single session but their memory resets once the session ends. Consider a research agent working on dozens of papers across multiple days: without memory, it has no way to store and retrieve what it learned across sessions. This short course teaches you to build a memory system that enables agents to persist memory and thereby learn across sessions. You'll design a Memory Manager that handles different memory types, implement semantic tool retrieval that scales without bloating the context, and build write-back pipelines that let your agent autonomously update and refine what it knows over time. Skills you'll gain: - Build persistent memory stores for different agent memory types - Implement a Memory Manager that orchestrates how your agent reads, writes, and retrieves memory - Treat tools as procedural memory and retrieve only relevant ones at inference time using semantic search Join and learn to build agents that remember and improve over time!

Andrew Ng

161,236 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

I had to test it myself to believe this unreal inference speed. 3,000 tokens/s for 1 user on standard datacenter GPUs. They leveraged a hidden efficiency gap in how GPUs generate tokens. Kog just achieved 3,000 tokens/s on 8× AMD MI300X GPUs and 2,100 on 8× NVIDIA H200 (FP16, no speculative decoding). Their tech preview is on a 2B model, and they show how their techniques will scale to large frontier MoE models at similar speeds. That's a huge number because normal low-batch GPU decoding for 2B to 8B models is usually closer to 100 to 300 tokens/s per request, so Kog is claiming something like a 10X to 30X jump in the speed one user actually feels. Their trick: they are getting the speed by treating LLM decoding as a memory streaming problem, not mainly a math problem. For 1 user at batch size 1, the GPU is not doing big, efficient matrix-matrix work like in training or large-batch serving; it is repeatedly pulling the model’s active weights from high-bandwidth memory for each new token, so speed depends on how smoothly those weights keep flowing. Normal inference stacks keep breaking that flow. They run many separate GPU programs for different parts of the model, move intermediate results through memory, wait at synchronization points, talk back to the CPU for scheduling or sampling, and then repeat this token after token. Kog’s answer is to co-design 3 things that are usually tuned separately: the runtime, the low-level GPU code, and the model architecture. The biggest engineering move is the monokernel, where the whole decode pass runs as 1 persistent GPU-resident program, including sampling, so the system does not keep stopping for kernel launches, CPU scheduling, and intermediate memory round trips. They also rebuilt synchronization, because their own measurements say grid sync was eating around 35% of token-generation time; instead of making every compute unit wait at a broad barrier, each unit waits only for the exact data it needs. On AMD MI300X, they also map memory access around the chiplet layout, because memory latency changes depending on which die makes the request. Then their Laneformer model uses Delayed Tensor Parallelism, which lets cross-GPU communication happen in the background instead of blocking every layer.
1:08

I had to test it myself to believe this unreal inference speed. 3,000 tokens/s for 1 user on standard datacenter GPUs. They leveraged a hidden efficiency gap in how GPUs generate tokens. Kog just achieved 3,000 tokens/s on 8× AMD MI300X GPUs and 2,100 on 8× NVIDIA H200 (FP16, no speculative decoding). Their tech preview is on a 2B model, and they show how their techniques will scale to large frontier MoE models at similar speeds. That's a huge number because normal low-batch GPU decoding for 2B to 8B models is usually closer to 100 to 300 tokens/s per request, so Kog is claiming something like a 10X to 30X jump in the speed one user actually feels. Their trick: they are getting the speed by treating LLM decoding as a memory streaming problem, not mainly a math problem. For 1 user at batch size 1, the GPU is not doing big, efficient matrix-matrix work like in training or large-batch serving; it is repeatedly pulling the model’s active weights from high-bandwidth memory for each new token, so speed depends on how smoothly those weights keep flowing. Normal inference stacks keep breaking that flow. They run many separate GPU programs for different parts of the model, move intermediate results through memory, wait at synchronization points, talk back to the CPU for scheduling or sampling, and then repeat this token after token. Kog’s answer is to co-design 3 things that are usually tuned separately: the runtime, the low-level GPU code, and the model architecture. The biggest engineering move is the monokernel, where the whole decode pass runs as 1 persistent GPU-resident program, including sampling, so the system does not keep stopping for kernel launches, CPU scheduling, and intermediate memory round trips. They also rebuilt synchronization, because their own measurements say grid sync was eating around 35% of token-generation time; instead of making every compute unit wait at a broad barrier, each unit waits only for the exact data it needs. On AMD MI300X, they also map memory access around the chiplet layout, because memory latency changes depending on which die makes the request. Then their Laneformer model uses Delayed Tensor Parallelism, which lets cross-GPU communication happen in the background instead of blocking every layer.

Rohan Paul

13,244 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

most agent memory is one file that grows forever and gets re-read every single turn. it overflows the context, overwrites old facts, loses the thread. that's why your agent feels sharp on day one and lost by week three. Sibyl Memory replaces the pile with a structure: → leaner context, lower token cost. a bloated agent file and flat memory get re-read in full every message. Sibyl Memory keeps a light hot layer and retrieves the rest on demand, so each turn carries only the tokens that matter. → relations are first-class. people link to projects, projects to deals, deals to the decisions behind them. ask about one partner and the agent surfaces the whole connected web around them. that relational context is what lets it help run a company. → one source of truth per fact, person, and project. no duplicates, no silent overwrites. works with hermes, claude code, and codex. beta open.
0:34

most agent memory is one file that grows forever and gets re-read every single turn. it overflows the context, overwrites old facts, loses the thread. that's why your agent feels sharp on day one and lost by week three. Sibyl Memory replaces the pile with a structure: → leaner context, lower token cost. a bloated agent file and flat memory get re-read in full every message. Sibyl Memory keeps a light hot layer and retrieves the rest on demand, so each turn carries only the tokens that matter. → relations are first-class. people link to projects, projects to deals, deals to the decisions behind them. ask about one partner and the agent surfaces the whole connected web around them. that relational context is what lets it help run a company. → one source of truth per fact, person, and project. no duplicates, no silent overwrites. works with hermes, claude code, and codex. beta open.

SIBYL

83,832 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

🚨THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO TELL Y'ALL 99% of retail doesn't understand the technology bottleneck the whole market is about to hit. Everyone thinks AI runs on compute. More GPUs, more power. wrong. The real wall is memory AND bandwidth... And this is EXACTLY where SpaceX stepped in... The entire backbone to the basically internet 2.0 is being built as you read this with the new Starlink V3 AI agents have to remember everything. every task, every step, every piece of context. That memory has to be stored AND moved. instantly. at a scale the world has never handled. Where does it all live? and how do you move it fast enough? The answer is a massive new layer of data infrastructure That's what the 100k V3 Starlinks are for. That's the backbone of internet 2.0 The nervous system linking AI memory across the planet and into orbit. Elon's building the physical layer of the entire AI age. You should thank God you're living in the same era with people like Musk. Follow me so you won't skip that generational opportunity.
0:25

🚨THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'M TRYING TO TELL Y'ALL 99% of retail doesn't understand the technology bottleneck the whole market is about to hit. Everyone thinks AI runs on compute. More GPUs, more power. wrong. The real wall is memory AND bandwidth... And this is EXACTLY where SpaceX stepped in... The entire backbone to the basically internet 2.0 is being built as you read this with the new Starlink V3 AI agents have to remember everything. every task, every step, every piece of context. That memory has to be stored AND moved. instantly. at a scale the world has never handled. Where does it all live? and how do you move it fast enough? The answer is a massive new layer of data infrastructure That's what the 100k V3 Starlinks are for. That's the backbone of internet 2.0 The nervous system linking AI memory across the planet and into orbit. Elon's building the physical layer of the entire AI age. You should thank God you're living in the same era with people like Musk. Follow me so you won't skip that generational opportunity.

Frogify

29,574 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

$MU $SKHY $DRAM Holy Shit $AMD's Lisa Su just spent two full minutes at the 2026 AI keynote raving about HBM4 capacity as the thing that separates Helios from the competition. Not compute. Memory. "When you compare Helios to the competition, we're delivering 15% more compute, 50% more HBM4 memory capacity and memory bandwidth, and 50% more scale-out bandwidth." Notice which number is bigger. "What that means is that every Helios can deliver more performance for the largest models, more capacity for longer context, and the bandwidth to scale across thousands of racks.... More than 18,000 CDNA five GPU compute units, over 4,600 Zen 6 CPU cores, and 31 terabytes of HBM4 memory, all in a single rack." "That's what it takes to run agentic AI at scale. Today, I'm excited to announce that Helios is in full production. We have shipments on track to start at the end of the third quarter and ramping into the fourth quarter in the second half of the year. I can tell you, customer demand for Helios is extremely strong, we're extremely proud of the work that we have done across the leading AI labs to adopt Helios."
1:53

$MU $SKHY $DRAM Holy Shit $AMD's Lisa Su just spent two full minutes at the 2026 AI keynote raving about HBM4 capacity as the thing that separates Helios from the competition. Not compute. Memory. "When you compare Helios to the competition, we're delivering 15% more compute, 50% more HBM4 memory capacity and memory bandwidth, and 50% more scale-out bandwidth." Notice which number is bigger. "What that means is that every Helios can deliver more performance for the largest models, more capacity for longer context, and the bandwidth to scale across thousands of racks.... More than 18,000 CDNA five GPU compute units, over 4,600 Zen 6 CPU cores, and 31 terabytes of HBM4 memory, all in a single rack." "That's what it takes to run agentic AI at scale. Today, I'm excited to announce that Helios is in full production. We have shipments on track to start at the end of the third quarter and ramping into the fourth quarter in the second half of the year. I can tell you, customer demand for Helios is extremely strong, we're extremely proud of the work that we have done across the leading AI labs to adopt Helios."

Trade Whisperer

180,403 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Dylan Patel of SemiAnalysis says a worse GPU with better storage and memory now beats the best chip without them, so buying the newest GPU alone no longer wins inference. So, an AMD GPU with more memory can outperform Nvidia in some cases. "So what we have is we have over $80 million of compute, GPUs from Nvidia, AMD, TPUs from Google, Trainium from Amazon, and we run this benchmark constantly on the newest inference engine, newest drivers, newest PyTorch version, whatever it is." "Every day it runs on an automated CI, and we run it on all the latest Chinese models, from GLM, Zhipu, Moonshot, Kimi, Alibaba, all these models we run." "Initially, when we were benchmarking the difference between these chips and different engines, different schemes for parallelism, we were just running it fixed context length." "But now with Agent X, we've analyzed over $5 million worth of Claude Code traces. This is real production traffic that people have donated to us as well as internally generated. Now we know what the actual agent workload looks like." "And then as we implement that and run those benchmarks, it turns out yes, the chip you're using is very important, but now even more important is how are you handling this memory offload?" "And so while an Nvidia GPU is faster than an AMD GPU in most cases, because AMD GPUs have more memory, they actually end up outperforming in some cases." "Or you can have a worse GPU, but a much better storage solution, and now you can outperform what the best GPU can do without those solutions. So just buying the newest and latest GPU alone doesn't get you the best inference economics." "Actually, you need to layer in all these other innovations including storage and memory." [ Who's the top player on your chart? ] "That really is a difficult multivariable problem. And generally that means you need to have, yes, you need to have the best GPU, a GB300, but you also need to have the best storage solutions. And so I won't spoil who's the best right here, but I will say that storage solutions matter a lot and memory solutions matter a lot, as does your front-end networking. That matters a lot."
2:00

Dylan Patel of SemiAnalysis says a worse GPU with better storage and memory now beats the best chip without them, so buying the newest GPU alone no longer wins inference. So, an AMD GPU with more memory can outperform Nvidia in some cases. "So what we have is we have over $80 million of compute, GPUs from Nvidia, AMD, TPUs from Google, Trainium from Amazon, and we run this benchmark constantly on the newest inference engine, newest drivers, newest PyTorch version, whatever it is." "Every day it runs on an automated CI, and we run it on all the latest Chinese models, from GLM, Zhipu, Moonshot, Kimi, Alibaba, all these models we run." "Initially, when we were benchmarking the difference between these chips and different engines, different schemes for parallelism, we were just running it fixed context length." "But now with Agent X, we've analyzed over $5 million worth of Claude Code traces. This is real production traffic that people have donated to us as well as internally generated. Now we know what the actual agent workload looks like." "And then as we implement that and run those benchmarks, it turns out yes, the chip you're using is very important, but now even more important is how are you handling this memory offload?" "And so while an Nvidia GPU is faster than an AMD GPU in most cases, because AMD GPUs have more memory, they actually end up outperforming in some cases." "Or you can have a worse GPU, but a much better storage solution, and now you can outperform what the best GPU can do without those solutions. So just buying the newest and latest GPU alone doesn't get you the best inference economics." "Actually, you need to layer in all these other innovations including storage and memory." [ Who's the top player on your chart? ] "That really is a difficult multivariable problem. And generally that means you need to have, yes, you need to have the best GPU, a GB300, but you also need to have the best storage solutions. And so I won't spoil who's the best right here, but I will say that storage solutions matter a lot and memory solutions matter a lot, as does your front-end networking. That matters a lot."

Fireside Alpha

175,586 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on why the model is not the moat. The application layer is: "To make them valuable in an enterprise, like a battlefield, regulated, or manufacturing context, you have to have what's called an application layer." "We have this thing called ontology that now everyone's copying. It takes a large language model and makes it safe and useful and precise." "Safe because it doesn't touch your underlying data." "Safe because it prevents the large language model from caching your data and replicating your business." The tell for any enterprise AI pitch: ask what sits between the model and your data. If the answer is nothing, you are not buying leverage. You are renting a fast way to hand your business to whoever owns the weights. Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, on CNBC.
0:24

Palantir CEO Alex Karp on why the model is not the moat. The application layer is: "To make them valuable in an enterprise, like a battlefield, regulated, or manufacturing context, you have to have what's called an application layer." "We have this thing called ontology that now everyone's copying. It takes a large language model and makes it safe and useful and precise." "Safe because it doesn't touch your underlying data." "Safe because it prevents the large language model from caching your data and replicating your business." The tell for any enterprise AI pitch: ask what sits between the model and your data. If the answer is nothing, you are not buying leverage. You are renting a fast way to hand your business to whoever owns the weights. Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir, on CNBC.

Karl Mehta

31,891 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

We think #GenAI will transform virtually every customer experience. That’s why we’re doubling down on all three layers of what’s called the GenAI “stack.” What do we mean by stack? Simple. Three layers, bottom to top. The “bottom layer” means the infrastructure. Think chips, servers, networking – the software, hardware, and computing power in our data centers used to train, build, and deploy AI models and applications. The “middle layer” is the GenAI sandbox – all the tools, Large Language Models (LLMs), and Foundation Models (FMs) we’ve built into Amazon Bedrock. This lets customers pick the #AI models that best fit their needs to easily and securely customize GenAI applications specific to their business. The “top layer” means the popular agents and assistants that people actually interact with – now including Amazon Q. These are built from the models in the middle layer – in Amazon Bedrock. While other apps might help you write a quick email, or edit an image, Amazon Q’s meant for taking care of business. It’s been engineered to be the most capable GenAI-powered assistant for speeding up software dev and leveraging companies’ internal data. Are you as bullish on the future of GenAI as we are? Listen to our CEO Andy Jassy talk about our investment across the stack.
1:19

We think #GenAI will transform virtually every customer experience. That’s why we’re doubling down on all three layers of what’s called the GenAI “stack.” What do we mean by stack? Simple. Three layers, bottom to top. The “bottom layer” means the infrastructure. Think chips, servers, networking – the software, hardware, and computing power in our data centers used to train, build, and deploy AI models and applications. The “middle layer” is the GenAI sandbox – all the tools, Large Language Models (LLMs), and Foundation Models (FMs) we’ve built into Amazon Bedrock. This lets customers pick the #AI models that best fit their needs to easily and securely customize GenAI applications specific to their business. The “top layer” means the popular agents and assistants that people actually interact with – now including Amazon Q. These are built from the models in the middle layer – in Amazon Bedrock. While other apps might help you write a quick email, or edit an image, Amazon Q’s meant for taking care of business. It’s been engineered to be the most capable GenAI-powered assistant for speeding up software dev and leveraging companies’ internal data. Are you as bullish on the future of GenAI as we are? Listen to our CEO Andy Jassy talk about our investment across the stack.

Amazon

47,421 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Engineer runs a Kimi K3 memory layer that costs $11 a month and remembers what a $500,000 vector database keeps losing. No embeddings. Four nodes and one rule about what's allowed to be forgotten. He published the whole schema. His version starts from the opposite idea. Memory is not a pile you search. It's a set of claims that expire unless something keeps paying to keep them. Four nodes. Every memory carries a clock someone has to reset: > WRITER - stores a fact with the reason it mattered, never raw text > DECAY - ages every memory down. Silence is deletion > RENEWER - only re-lifts a memory the model actually used again > GRAVE - holds what died, and why nobody reached for it Three nodes keep memory alive. One keeps the dead ones. Recall isn't storage here. It's rent a fact has to keep earning. That's the entire design. When everything is remembered forever, the useful and the stale retrieve identically. He replayed two months of agent context. 90,000 stored facts. 71,000 never retrieved once. The vector store returned all of them on similarity. Similarity graded closeness. Nobody graded whether the memory was ever right. Everyone else stuffs more into the context window and calls it memory. He built a layer that lets a fact die unless it keeps proving itself. The cost isn't storage. It's finding out how much of what your agent "knows" it has never once used. The article below is the full build - node prompts, the decay curve, the renewal rule. Save it. You'll want it open in the other tab.
0:40

Engineer runs a Kimi K3 memory layer that costs $11 a month and remembers what a $500,000 vector database keeps losing. No embeddings. Four nodes and one rule about what's allowed to be forgotten. He published the whole schema. His version starts from the opposite idea. Memory is not a pile you search. It's a set of claims that expire unless something keeps paying to keep them. Four nodes. Every memory carries a clock someone has to reset: > WRITER - stores a fact with the reason it mattered, never raw text > DECAY - ages every memory down. Silence is deletion > RENEWER - only re-lifts a memory the model actually used again > GRAVE - holds what died, and why nobody reached for it Three nodes keep memory alive. One keeps the dead ones. Recall isn't storage here. It's rent a fact has to keep earning. That's the entire design. When everything is remembered forever, the useful and the stale retrieve identically. He replayed two months of agent context. 90,000 stored facts. 71,000 never retrieved once. The vector store returned all of them on similarity. Similarity graded closeness. Nobody graded whether the memory was ever right. Everyone else stuffs more into the context window and calls it memory. He built a layer that lets a fact die unless it keeps proving itself. The cost isn't storage. It's finding out how much of what your agent "knows" it has never once used. The article below is the full build - node prompts, the decay curve, the renewal rule. Save it. You'll want it open in the other tab.

wast3

64,039 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag

UC Berkeley just open-sourced FreeToken. (2–4x faster local LLM inference than Ollama) the results are wild: - Qwen3.6-35B on an 8GB GPU at 39.3 tokens/s - DeepSeek-V4-Flash 284B on a 32GB GPU at 22 tokens/s - GLM-5.2 753B on a 96GB GPU at 14.9 tokens/s a 35B model at 16-bit precision needs about 70GB just for its weights. even at 4 bits it is close to 18GB, and FreeToken serves it on an 8GB GPU. let me explain how: all three models mentioned above are Mixture-of-Experts, and that is what FreeToken takes advantage of. each layer holds hundreds of separate experts plus a small router that picks a few of them per token. Qwen3.6-35B activates roughly 3B of its 35B parameters per token. DeepSeek-V4-Flash picks 6 of 256 experts per layer, so 13B of its 284B run at a time. so compute was never the bottleneck. the weights a single step touches fit comfortably on a consumer GPU. every expert the router might pick still has to exist somewhere. they sit in system RAM, and the GPU keeps a cache of the ones the model has been using recently. so everything comes down to what happens when the router picks an expert that is not on the GPU. there are two ways to serve that miss: 1. copy it over PCIe and run it on the GPU 2. run it on the CPU, where it already lives both read from the same system memory, so they compete for one pool of bandwidth instead of adding to each other. existing engines pick one option and freeze it when the model loads. but routing changes on every token, so a fixed choice misses most of what the model asks for. FreeToken measures both bandwidths on your machine and splits each step's misses between the two paths in proportion. the GPU and CPU results then merge exactly, with no approximation. two machines with the same GPU can end up wanting opposite strategies, which I did not expect. a 5090 in a gaming desktop should push nearly everything over PCIe, while an 8GB laptop is better off computing most misses on the CPU. none of that is readable off a spec sheet, so the engine profiles it once per machine. the second half of the design is about agents. coding agents constantly rewrite their own history, and every edit normally forces thousands of tokens back through prefill. FreeToken saves its checkpoints at the exact boundaries agent frameworks cut on, so it only reprocesses the new part. its slowest first token stays under 44 seconds, while llama.cpp peaks at 232 and KTransformers at 946. it serves the OpenAI and Anthropic APIs under Apache 2.0, so Claude Code and Codex can point at it directly. releasing weights publicly decides who can download a model, not who can afford to run one. frontier open models keep shipping, and running them still assumes a rented cluster. meanwhile there are over a hundred million consumer machines with discrete GPUs sitting mostly idle. closing that gap was never a hardware problem, and work like this is what turns open weights into something you can actually use. paper: repo: almost every idea in this post, from why memory bandwidth decides the outcome to why moving weights costs more than computing on them, comes straight out of how a GPU is built. I wrote a detailed primer on that. the article is quoted below.
0:42

UC Berkeley just open-sourced FreeToken. (2–4x faster local LLM inference than Ollama) the results are wild: - Qwen3.6-35B on an 8GB GPU at 39.3 tokens/s - DeepSeek-V4-Flash 284B on a 32GB GPU at 22 tokens/s - GLM-5.2 753B on a 96GB GPU at 14.9 tokens/s a 35B model at 16-bit precision needs about 70GB just for its weights. even at 4 bits it is close to 18GB, and FreeToken serves it on an 8GB GPU. let me explain how: all three models mentioned above are Mixture-of-Experts, and that is what FreeToken takes advantage of. each layer holds hundreds of separate experts plus a small router that picks a few of them per token. Qwen3.6-35B activates roughly 3B of its 35B parameters per token. DeepSeek-V4-Flash picks 6 of 256 experts per layer, so 13B of its 284B run at a time. so compute was never the bottleneck. the weights a single step touches fit comfortably on a consumer GPU. every expert the router might pick still has to exist somewhere. they sit in system RAM, and the GPU keeps a cache of the ones the model has been using recently. so everything comes down to what happens when the router picks an expert that is not on the GPU. there are two ways to serve that miss: 1. copy it over PCIe and run it on the GPU 2. run it on the CPU, where it already lives both read from the same system memory, so they compete for one pool of bandwidth instead of adding to each other. existing engines pick one option and freeze it when the model loads. but routing changes on every token, so a fixed choice misses most of what the model asks for. FreeToken measures both bandwidths on your machine and splits each step's misses between the two paths in proportion. the GPU and CPU results then merge exactly, with no approximation. two machines with the same GPU can end up wanting opposite strategies, which I did not expect. a 5090 in a gaming desktop should push nearly everything over PCIe, while an 8GB laptop is better off computing most misses on the CPU. none of that is readable off a spec sheet, so the engine profiles it once per machine. the second half of the design is about agents. coding agents constantly rewrite their own history, and every edit normally forces thousands of tokens back through prefill. FreeToken saves its checkpoints at the exact boundaries agent frameworks cut on, so it only reprocesses the new part. its slowest first token stays under 44 seconds, while llama.cpp peaks at 232 and KTransformers at 946. it serves the OpenAI and Anthropic APIs under Apache 2.0, so Claude Code and Codex can point at it directly. releasing weights publicly decides who can download a model, not who can afford to run one. frontier open models keep shipping, and running them still assumes a rented cluster. meanwhile there are over a hundred million consumer machines with discrete GPUs sitting mostly idle. closing that gap was never a hardware problem, and work like this is what turns open weights into something you can actually use. paper: repo: almost every idea in this post, from why memory bandwidth decides the outcome to why moving weights costs more than computing on them, comes straight out of how a GPU is built. I wrote a detailed primer on that. the article is quoted below.

Akshay 🚀

334,851 Aufrufe • vor 7 Tagen

$CBRS is a very unique company because it keeps a huge amount of compute and memory very close together which helps it deliver extremely fast inference and makes the architecture well positioned for agentic AI workloads where fast tokens matter more. OpenAI validated the tec but the stock is getting hit because we still don't have enough visibility into how Cerebras turns that technical advantage into a broad, diversified and high-margin business. Customer concentration remains a massive risk especially with so much revenue tied to its own investor and the company still has to solve the physical infrastructure side of the business across power, cooling, data center capacity and deployment timing. If $NVDA is trading at a below-market multiple while still growing faster than Cerebras then why buy the Nvidia alternative instead of just owning Nvidia?
0:59

$CBRS is a very unique company because it keeps a huge amount of compute and memory very close together which helps it deliver extremely fast inference and makes the architecture well positioned for agentic AI workloads where fast tokens matter more. OpenAI validated the tec but the stock is getting hit because we still don't have enough visibility into how Cerebras turns that technical advantage into a broad, diversified and high-margin business. Customer concentration remains a massive risk especially with so much revenue tied to its own investor and the company still has to solve the physical infrastructure side of the business across power, cooling, data center capacity and deployment timing. If $NVDA is trading at a below-market multiple while still growing faster than Cerebras then why buy the Nvidia alternative instead of just owning Nvidia?

Shay Boloor

204,924 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Backpropagation by hand ✍️ ~ 11 steps walkthrough below Backpropagation is the algorithm that actually trains a neural network, and it is where most people stop following along. It is not calculus you cannot do. It is matrix multiplication, working backward, one layer at a time. So I drew and calculated one entirely by hand. Goal: push the loss gradient back through a 3-layer network and land on a new value for every weight and bias. = 1. Given = A 3-layer perceptron, an input X, predictions Ypred = [0.5, 0.5, 0], and the truth Ytarget = [0, 1, 0]. = 2. Backprop gradient cells = Let us draw empty cells for every gradient we are about to compute. The shape of the answer comes first. = 3. Layer 3 softmax = We get dL/dz3 straight from Ypred minus Ytarget = [0.5, -0.5, 0]. No chain rule needed, and that shortcut is the whole reason softmax and cross-entropy are paired. = 4. Layer 3 weights and biases = Let us multiply dL/dz3 by [a2 | 1]. One multiplication gives the gradient for W3 and b3 together. = 5. Layer 2 activations = We multiply dL/dz3 by W3 to get dL/da2. The gradient moves back across a layer the same way the signal moved forward. = 6. Layer 2 ReLU = Let us pass it through the gate: keep the gradient where the activation was positive, zero it everywhere else. = 7. Layer 2 weights and biases = We multiply dL/dz2 by [a1 | 1]. The same figure as step 4, one layer up. = 8. Layer 1 activations = Let us multiply dL/dz2 by W2. = 9. Layer 1 ReLU = We apply the same gate again, now on a1. = 10. Layer 1 weights and biases = Let us multiply dL/dz1 by [x | 1], and every weight in the network now has a gradient. = 11. Update = We subtract, and the network has learned. In practice a learning rate scales this step. The gradients: dL/dz3 = [0.5, -0.5, 0] dL/da1 = [1, -2, 2, -1] dL/dz1 = [0, -2, 2, -1] The takeaway: matrix multiplication is all you need. Just like the forward pass, backpropagation is matrix multiplications end to end. You can do every one by hand, slowly and imperfectly, which is exactly why a GPU's ability to do them fast mattered so much to deep learning. 💾 Save this post!
0:26

Backpropagation by hand ✍️ ~ 11 steps walkthrough below Backpropagation is the algorithm that actually trains a neural network, and it is where most people stop following along. It is not calculus you cannot do. It is matrix multiplication, working backward, one layer at a time. So I drew and calculated one entirely by hand. Goal: push the loss gradient back through a 3-layer network and land on a new value for every weight and bias. = 1. Given = A 3-layer perceptron, an input X, predictions Ypred = [0.5, 0.5, 0], and the truth Ytarget = [0, 1, 0]. = 2. Backprop gradient cells = Let us draw empty cells for every gradient we are about to compute. The shape of the answer comes first. = 3. Layer 3 softmax = We get dL/dz3 straight from Ypred minus Ytarget = [0.5, -0.5, 0]. No chain rule needed, and that shortcut is the whole reason softmax and cross-entropy are paired. = 4. Layer 3 weights and biases = Let us multiply dL/dz3 by [a2 | 1]. One multiplication gives the gradient for W3 and b3 together. = 5. Layer 2 activations = We multiply dL/dz3 by W3 to get dL/da2. The gradient moves back across a layer the same way the signal moved forward. = 6. Layer 2 ReLU = Let us pass it through the gate: keep the gradient where the activation was positive, zero it everywhere else. = 7. Layer 2 weights and biases = We multiply dL/dz2 by [a1 | 1]. The same figure as step 4, one layer up. = 8. Layer 1 activations = Let us multiply dL/dz2 by W2. = 9. Layer 1 ReLU = We apply the same gate again, now on a1. = 10. Layer 1 weights and biases = Let us multiply dL/dz1 by [x | 1], and every weight in the network now has a gradient. = 11. Update = We subtract, and the network has learned. In practice a learning rate scales this step. The gradients: dL/dz3 = [0.5, -0.5, 0] dL/da1 = [1, -2, 2, -1] dL/dz1 = [0, -2, 2, -1] The takeaway: matrix multiplication is all you need. Just like the forward pass, backpropagation is matrix multiplications end to end. You can do every one by hand, slowly and imperfectly, which is exactly why a GPU's ability to do them fast mattered so much to deep learning. 💾 Save this post!

Tom Yeh

959,882 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat