![]() |
|
where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - Printable Version +- Inference (https://www.datasculpting.ai/inference) +-- Forum: RAG & Knowledge Systems (https://www.datasculpting.ai/inference/forumdisplay.php?fid=14) +--- Forum: RAG (https://www.datasculpting.ai/inference/forumdisplay.php?fid=58) +--- Thread: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? (/showthread.php?tid=1177) Pages:
1
2
|
where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - orbitgarden - 10-13-2026 Thought I'd post a small recipe because a lot of threads ask similar things. This isn't revolutionary, but the combination of llama.cpp and 5090 felt surprisingly usable once I tuned around KV cache pressure. If someone wants the exact settings I can clean them up and post them. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - tinycontext - 10-14-2026 Interesting, I hadn't tried that. The pattern around workstation thermals has been pretty similar for me. I got better results once I stopped chasing one metric and just looked at whether the workflow felt usable. There are a few different conversations hiding inside this thread, so being explicit about the goal helps. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - torchsupply99 - 10-14-2026 Did a small comparison this afternoon. I couldn't reproduce the slowdown until I pushed context much higher. I expected the model choice to matter more than it did. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - macropilot - 10-15-2026 Thanks, that helps. I don't think your conclusion is far off. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - kernelghost - 10-15-2026 Ran a quick check on my box. My result was mixed: first run looked bad, second run looked normal. The main thing that moved was latency, not quality. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - labpath - 10-15-2026 I'd approach it in a boring order. If you're on llama.cpp, I'd confirm the version first and then reduce variables until the behavior is obvious. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - deltastation - 10-17-2026 A couple things I'd check first. Start by verifying the driver/runtime combo, then test with a smaller prompt, then look at continuous batching. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - modbench - 10-17-2026 Quote:A couple things I'd check first. Start by verifying the driver/runtime combo, then test with a smaller prompt, then look at continuous batching. I hit almost the same issue last night. If you post your exact settings, people here can probably narrow it down pretty fast. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - tinycontext - 10-18-2026 Quote:[quote]A couple things I'd check first. Start by verifying the driver/runtime combo, then test with a smaller prompt, then look at continuous batching Ran a quick check on my box. The issue went away once I changed one setting and restarted the stack cleanly. The main thing that moved was latency, not quality. Re: where reranking mattered: what are you seeing? - tensorfield88 - 10-18-2026 Need a little more detail here. What model, what runtime, and roughly what context size? |