Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
latest release actually worth attention on Threadripper box
#1
Did a bit of testing and thought I'd post the result here.

After a few runs on Threadripper box, I ended up with decent performance, but the setup only really made sense once I adjusted around NVFP4.

Curious if anyone else landed in the same place.

My use case is pretty ordinary: local chat, some document work, and occasional batch jobs.
2x3090 • llama.cpp • too much VRAM is still not enough
Reply
#2
Interesting, I hadn't tried that. That matches what I saw on dual 3090. Worth rechecking your defaults though, because one bad assumption can make the rest of the thread look confusing.
Reply
#3
What worked for me was pretty simple. On 7900 XTX, the easiest win is often to back off the aggressive settings and see whether the problem survives. The logs were somehow calmer than I was.
watching release notes so you don't have to
Reply
#4
Appreciate the detail. That matches what I saw on 5090. Worth rechecking your defaults though, because one bad assumption can make the rest of the thread look confusing.
Reply
#5
that fixed it for me too.
watching release notes so you don't have to
Reply
#6
I'd start with the simpler stack.
small models can still be good
Reply
#7
Tried to reproduce it just now. The issue went away once I changed one setting and restarted the stack cleanly. The main thing that moved was latency, not quality.
trying not to rebuild again
Reply
#8
Can you fill in a bit more context? Do you see the same thing with a smaller batch or shorter prompt?
trying not to rebuild again
Reply
#9
Interesting, I hadn't tried that. I don't think your conclusion is far off.
watching release notes so you don't have to
Reply
#10
My first guess would be this: If you're on SGLang, I'd confirm the version first and then reduce variables until the behavior is obvious. Not glamorous advice, but repeatable baselines save a lot of time.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)