Live data from Hacker News

PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

github.com

51–60 of 98 posts

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#51
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First crypto then AI, I wish GPUs were left alone for gaming.

Didn’t nvidia try to block this in software by slowing down mining? Seems like we just need consumer matrix math cards with literally no video out, and then a different set of requirements for those with a video out.

But Nvidia doesn't want to make consumer compute cards because those might steal market share from the datacenter compute cards they are selling at 5x markup.

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe that the issue is that graphic cards require really fast memory. This requires close memory placement (that's why the memory is so close to the core on the board). expandable memory will not be able to provide the required bandwidth here.

The universe used to have hierarchies. Fast memory close, slow memory far. Registers. L1. L2. L3. RAM. Swap. The same thing would make a lot of sense here. Super-fast memory close, with overflow into classic DDR slots. As a footnote, going parallel also helps. 8 sticks of RAM at 1/8 the bandwidth each is the same as one stick of RAM at 8x the bandwidth, if you don't multiplex onto the same traces.

GPUs have memory hierarchies too. A 4090 has about 16MB of L1 cache and 72MB of L2 cache, followed by the 24GB of GDDR6 RAM, followed by host ram that can be accessed via PCIe.

The issue is that GPUs are massively parallel. A 4090 has 128 streaming multiprocessors, each executing 128 "threads" or "lanes" in parallel. If each "thread" works on a different part of memory that leaves you with 1kB of L1 cache per thread, and 4.5kB of L2 cache each. For each clock cycle you might be issuing thousands of request to your memory controller for cache misses and prefetching. That's why you want insanely fast RAM.

You can write CUDA code that directly accesses your host memory as a layer beyond that, but usually you want to transfer that data in bigger chunks. You probably could make a card that adds DDR4 slots as an additional level of hierarchy. It's the kind of weird stuff Intel might do (the Phi had some interesting memory layout ideas).

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No kidding... Intel is playing catch-up with Nvidia in the AI space and a big reason for that is their offerings aren't competitive. You can get an Intel Arc A770 with 16GB of VRAM (which was released in October, 2022) for about $300 or an Nvidia 4060 Ti with 16GB of VRAM for ~$500 which is twice as fast for AI workloads in reality (see: https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FtXkrY6AD8YypMiHrZuy4K-120... ) This is a huge…

Based on leaks, it looks like intel somehow missed an easy opportunity here. There is an insane demand for high VRAM cards now, and it seems the next intel cards will be 12GB. Intel, screw everything else, just pack as much VRAM in those as you can. Build it and they will come.

Exactly, I'd love to have 1TB of RAM that can be accessed at 6000 MT/s.

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#54
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree. Who will buy it? A few enthusiasts who wants to run LLM locally but cannot afford M3 or 4090? It will be a niche product with poor sales.

I think there's more than a few enthusiasts who would be very interesting in buying 1 or more of these cards (if they had 32+ GB of memory), but I don't have any data to back that opinion up. It is not only those who can't afford a 4090 though. While the 4090 can run models that use less than 24GB of memory at blistering speeds, models are going to continue to scale up and 24GB is fairly limiting. Because LLM inferen…

>models are going to continue to scale up and 24GB is fairly limiting

>24GB is fairly limiting

Can I take a moment to suggest that maybe we're very spoiled?

24GB of VRAM is more than most peoples' system RAM, and that is "fairly limiting"?

To think Bill once said 640KB would be enough.

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#55

The company that did 4-cores-forever, has the opportunity to redeem itself, in its next consumer GPU release, by disrupting the "8-16GB VRAM forever" that AMD and Nvidia have been imposing on us for a decade. It would be poetic to see 32-48GB at a non-eye-watering price point. Intel definitely seems to be doing all the right things on software support.

> Intel definitely seems to be doing all the right things on software support.

Can you elaborate on this? Intel's reputation for software support hasn't been stellar, what's changed?

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#56
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming you want to maintain full bandwidth. Which I don't care too much about. However, even 16->24GB is a big step, since a lot of the model are developed for 3090/4090-class hardware. 36GB would place it lose to the class of the fancy 40GB data center cards. If Intel decided to push VRAM, it will definitely have a market. Critically, a lot of folks will also be incentivized to make software compatible, since it w…

How comes you don't care about full bandwidth?

The thing about RAM speed (aka bandwidth) is that it becomes irrelevant if you run out and have to page out to slower tiers of storage.

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#57
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree. Who will buy it? A few enthusiasts who wants to run LLM locally but cannot afford M3 or 4090? It will be a niche product with poor sales.

I tend to agree that it would be niche. The machine learning enthusiast market is far smaller than the gamer market. But selling to machine learning enthusiasts is not a bad place to be. A lot of these enthusiasts are going to go on to work at places that are deploying enterprise AI at scale. Right now, almost all of their experience is CUDA and they're likely to recommend hardware they're familiar with. By making co…

It would be same playbook that NVIDIA did CUDA where was market 2010 when it was research labs and hobbyists doing vector calculations.

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No kidding... Intel is playing catch-up with Nvidia in the AI space and a big reason for that is their offerings aren't competitive. You can get an Intel Arc A770 with 16GB of VRAM (which was released in October, 2022) for about $300 or an Nvidia 4060 Ti with 16GB of VRAM for ~$500 which is twice as fast for AI workloads in reality (see: https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FtXkrY6AD8YypMiHrZuy4K-120... ) This is a huge…

I don't agree. Who will buy it? A few enthusiasts who wants to run LLM locally but cannot afford M3 or 4090? It will be a niche product with poor sales.

It's about mindshare. Random people using your product to do AI means that the tooling is going to improve because people will try to use them. But as it stands right now if you think there's any chance you want to use AI in the next 5 years, then why would you buy anything other than Nvidia?

It doesn't even matter if that's your primary goal or not.

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#59
post #54
post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's more than a few enthusiasts who would be very interesting in buying 1 or more of these cards (if they had 32+ GB of memory), but I don't have any data to back that opinion up. It is not only those who can't afford a 4090 though. While the 4090 can run models that use less than 24GB of memory at blistering speeds, models are going to continue to scale up and 24GB is fairly limiting. Because LLM inferen…

>models are going to continue to scale up and 24GB is fairly limiting >24GB is fairly limiting Can I take a moment to suggest that maybe we're very spoiled? 24GB of VRAM is more than most peoples' system RAM, and that is "fairly limiting"? To think Bill once said 640KB would be enough.

It doesn't matter whether anyone is "spoiled" or not.

The fact is large language models require a lot of VRAM, and the more interesting ones need more than 24GB to run.

The people who are able to afford systems with more than 24GB VRAM will go buy hardware that gives them that, and when GPU vendors release products with insufficient VRAM they limit their market.

I mean inequality is definitely increasing at a worrying rate these days, but let's keep the discussion on topic...

Re: PyTorch Library for Running LLM on Intel CPU and GPU

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No kidding... Intel is playing catch-up with Nvidia in the AI space and a big reason for that is their offerings aren't competitive. You can get an Intel Arc A770 with 16GB of VRAM (which was released in October, 2022) for about $300 or an Nvidia 4060 Ti with 16GB of VRAM for ~$500 which is twice as fast for AI workloads in reality (see: https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/FtXkrY6AD8YypMiHrZuy4K-120... ) This is a huge…

I don't agree. Who will buy it? A few enthusiasts who wants to run LLM locally but cannot afford M3 or 4090? It will be a niche product with poor sales.

AFAIK, unless you are a huge American corp with orders above $100m Nvidia will only sell you old and expensive server cards like the crappy A40 PCIe 4.0 48GB GDDR6 at $5,000. Good luck getting SXM H100s or GH200.

If Intel sells a stackable kit with a lot of RAM and a reasonable interconnect a lot of corporate customers will buy. It doesn't even have to be that good, just half way between PCIe 5.0 and NVLink.

But it seems they are still too stuck in their old ways. I wouldn't count on them waking up. Nor AMD. It's sad.

Post reply on HN