Posts: 41
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
This keeps coming up in conversation so I figured I'd start a thread.
It feels like the conversation has shifted hard toward inference and serving details lately, and honestly that makes sense once you start dealing with VRAM headroom.
Curious whether that lines up with what other people are seeing. Turns out 'just one more test' was a lie.
curious and caffeinated
Posts: 31
Threads: 5
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
A couple things I'd check first. On mini PC, the easiest win is often to back off the aggressive settings and see whether the problem survives.
Posts: 35
Threads: 7
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
Need a little more detail here. Is this local-only or are you routing anything externally?
curious and caffeinated
Posts: 168
Threads: 14
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
Thanks, that helps. That matches what I saw on M3 Max. I got better results once I stopped chasing one metric and just looked at whether the workflow felt usable.
2x3090 • llama.cpp • too much VRAM is still not enough
Posts: 30
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
Appreciate the detail. The pattern around quant drift has been pretty similar for me. The biggest change for me was simplifying the stack instead of adding one more optimization layer.
Posts: 41
Threads: 5
Joined: Aug 2026
Reputation:
0
I'd start with the simpler stack.
Posts: 28
Threads: 4
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
I'd approach it in a boring order. On dual 3090, the easiest win is often to back off the aggressive settings and see whether the problem survives. Once you know the plain path works, then add the faster path back in piece by piece.
Posts: 168
Threads: 14
Joined: Sep 2026
Reputation:
0
Need a little more detail here. Are you testing this on Threadripper box or something else?
2x3090 • llama.cpp • too much VRAM is still not enough