Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
benchmark result I don't trust: anyone testing this?
#1
Did a bit of testing and thought I'd post the result here.

After a few runs on dual 3090, I ended up with decent performance, but the setup only really made sense once I adjusted around router policy.

Nothing scientific here, just practical notes from a real setup.
post logs or it didn't happen
Reply
#2
I tested this tonight. My result was mixed: first run looked bad, second run looked normal.
Reply
#3
My first guess would be this: If you're on llama.cpp, I'd confirm the version first and then reduce variables until the behavior is obvious. A lot of these threads end up being one bad config plus a pile of conclusions drawn from it.
rack in the garage • local models everywhere
Reply
#4
A couple questions before I guess too hard. Are you testing this on dual 3090 or something else?
measure twice, benchmark three times
Reply
#5
I'd approach it in a boring order. Before rebuilding anything, I'd test one clean baseline with FLUX and compare from there.
team red, team patient
Reply
#6
Quote:I'd approach it in a boring order. Before rebuilding anything, I'd test one clean baseline with FLUX and compare from there.

Maybe, but I had the opposite result. I've seen people blame VRAM headroom when the real issue was much more mundane. Worth testing the simpler explanation before adopting the more interesting one.
Reply
#7
Quote:
Quote:I'd approach it in a boring order. Before rebuilding anything, I'd test one clean baseline with FLUX and compare from there.

worth checking the driver first.
post logs or it didn't happen
Reply
#8
What exact setup are you running? What model, what runtime, and roughly what context size?
measure twice, benchmark three times
Reply
#9
A couple things I'd check first. If you're on vLLM, I'd confirm the version first and then reduce variables until the behavior is obvious.
Reply
#10
I'd approach it in a boring order. Start by verifying the driver/runtime combo, then test with a smaller prompt, then look at tail latency. Not glamorous advice, but repeatable baselines save a lot of time.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)