Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
why did throughput drop after update
#1
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 4090 felt surprisingly usable once I tuned around structured output.

Feel free to tear it apart if you see something dumb.
learning in public
Reply
#2
Quote:Thought I'd post a small recipe because a lot of threads ask similar things.

What worked for me was pretty simple. Start by verifying the driver/runtime combo, then test with a smaller prompt, then look at prefill/decode split. Once you know the plain path works, then add the faster path back in piece by piece.
Reply
#3
Good point. That matches what I saw on 5090. I got better results once I stopped chasing one metric and just looked at whether the workflow felt usable.
Reply
#4
What worked for me was pretty simple. If you're on TensorRT-LLM, I'd confirm the version first and then reduce variables until the behavior is obvious. Once you know the plain path works, then add the faster path back in piece by piece.
Reply
#5
What exact setup are you running? Are you testing this on A6000 or something else?
Reply
#6
Quote:What exact setup are you running? Are you testing this on A6000 or something else?

A couple questions before I guess too hard. Is this local-only or are you routing anything externally?
throughput matters, but tail latency matters too
Reply
#7
I think the bottleneck is somewhere else. The reported numbers can look compelling, but in ordinary usage I didn't see the same benefit. Worth testing the simpler explanation before adopting the more interesting one.
learning in public
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)