Live data from Hacker News

Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

twitter.com

251–260 of 311 posts

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This looks really good..

It's great. It's super easy to install ollama locally, `ollama run `, change the continue config to point to it, and it just works. It even has an offline option by disabling telemetry.

> Windows coming soon

ugh, not so easy.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#252
post #108
post #79

How come a company as big as Meta still uses bit.ly ?

Ironically it doesn't help to use link shorteners on twitter anyway - all URLs posted to twitter count as 23 characters. The hypertext is the truncated original URL string, and the URL is actually a t.co link.

Shorteners these days are for analytics, not shortening per se.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#253
post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not required to put the whole model in a single GPU. You can buy a 24GB gpu for $150-ish (P40).

Wow that's a really good idea. I could potentially buy 4 Nvidia P40's for the same price as a 3090 and run inference on pretty much any model I want.

For reference for readers.

SUPPORTED

=========

* Ada / Hopper / A4xxx (but not A4000)

* Ampere / A3xxx

* Turing / Quadro RTX / GTX 16xx / RTX 20XX / Volta / Tesla

EOL 2023/2024

=============

* Pascal / Quadro P / Geforce GTX 10XX / Tesla

Unsupported

===========

* Maxwell

* Kepler

* Fermi

* Tesla (yes, this one pops up over and over, chaotically)

* Curie

Older don't really do GPGPU much. The older cards are also quite slow relative to modern ones! A lot of the ancient workstation cards can run big models cheaply, but (1) with incredible software complexity (2) very slowly, even relative to modern CPUs.

Blender rendering very much isn't ML, but it is a nice, standardized benchmark:

https://opendata.blender.org/

As a point of reference: A P40 has a score of 774 for Blender rendering, and a 4090 has 11,321. There are CPUs ($$$) in the 2000 mark, so about dual P40. It's hard for me to justify a P40-style GPU over something like a 4060Ti 16GB (3800), an Arc a770 16GB (1900), or a 7600XT 16GB (1300). They cost more, but the speed difference is nontrivial, as is the compatibility difference and support life. A lot of work is going into making modern Intel / AMD GPUs supported, while ancient ones are being deprecated.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#254

Everyone is mentioning using 4090 and a smaller model, but I rarely see an analysis where the energy consumption is used. I think Copilot is already highly subsidized by Microsoft. Let's say you use Copilot around 30% of your daily work hours. How much kWh does an opensource 7B or 13B model use then in a month on one 4090? EDIT: I think for a 13B at 30% use per day it comes around 30$/no on energy bill. So probably w…

Running models locally using GPU inference shouldn't be too bad as the biggest impact in terms of performance is ram/vram bandwidth rather than compute. Some rough power figures for a dual AMD GPU setup (24gb vram total) on a 5950x (base power usage of around 100w) using llama.cpp (i.e., a ChatGPT style interface, not Copilot):

46b Mixtral q4 (26.5 gb required) with around 75% in vram: 15 tokens/s - 300w at the wall, nvtop reporting GPU power usage of 70w/30w, 0.37kWh

46b Mixtral q2 (16.1 gb required) with 100% in vram: 30 tokens/s - 350w, nvtop 150w/50w, 0.21kWh.

Same test with 0% in vram: 7 tokens/s - 250w, 0.65kWh

7b Mistral q8 (7.2gb required) with 100% in vram: 45 tokens/s - 300w, nvtop 170w, 0.12kWh

The kWh figures are an estimate for generating 64k tokens (around 35 minutes at 30 tokens/s), it's not an ideal estimate as it only assumes generation and ignores the overhead of prompt processing or having longer contexts in general.

The power usage essentially mirrors token generation speed, which shouldn't be too surprising. The more of the model you can load into fast vram the faster tokens will generate and the less power you'll use for the same amount of tokens generated. Also note that I'm using mid and low tier AMD cards, with the mid tier card being used for the 7b test. If you have an Nvidia card with fast memory bandwidth (i.e., a 3090/4090), or an Apple ARM Ultra, you're going to see in the region of 60 tokens/s for the 7b model. With a mid range Nvidia card (any of the 4070s), or an Apple ARM Max, you can probably expect similar performance on 7b models (45 t/s or so). Apple ARM probably wins purely on total power usage, but you're also going to be paying an arm and a leg for a 64gb model which is the minimum you'd want to run medium/large sized models with reasonable quants (46b Mixtral at q6/8, or 70b at q6), but with the rate models are advancing you may be able to get away with 32gb (Mixtral at q4/6, 34b at q6, 70b at q3).

I'm not sure how many tokens a Copilot style interface is going to churn though but it's probably in the same ballpark. A reasonable figure for either interface at the high end is probably a kWh a day, and even in expensive regions like Europe it's probably no more than $15/mo. The actual cost comparison then becomes a little complicated, spending $1500 on 2 3090s for 48gb of fast vram isn't going to make sense for most people, similarly making do with whatever cards you can get your hands on so long as they have a reasonable amount of vram probably isn't going to pay off in the long run. It also depends on the size of the model you want to use and what amount of quantisation you're willing to put up with, current 34b models or Mixtral at reasonable quants (q4 at least) should be comparable to ChatGPT 3.5, future local models may end up getting better performance (either in terms of generation speed or how smart they are) but ChatGPT 5 may blow everything we have now out of the water. It seems far too early to make purchasing decisions based on what may happen, but most people should be able to run 7b/13b and maybe up to 34/46b models with what they have and not break the bank when it comes time to pay the power bill.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow that's a really good idea. I could potentially buy 4 Nvidia P40's for the same price as a 3090 and run inference on pretty much any model I want.

For reference for readers. SUPPORTED ========= * Ada / Hopper / A4xxx (but not A4000) * Ampere / A3xxx * Turing / Quadro RTX / GTX 16xx / RTX 20XX / Volta / Tesla EOL 2023/2024 ============= * Pascal / Quadro P / Geforce GTX 10XX / Tesla Unsupported =========== * Maxwell * Kepler * Fermi * Tesla (yes, this one pops up over and over, chaotically) * Curie Older don't really do GPGPU much. The older cards are also quite…

P40 is essentially a faster 1080 with 24GB ram. For many tasks (including LLMs) it's easy to be memory bandwidth bottlenecked and if you are they are more evenly matched. (newer hardware has more bandwidth, sure but not in a cost proportional manner).

I find that my hosts using 9x P40 do inference on 70b models MUCH MUCH faster than a e.g. a dual 7763 and cost a lot less. ... and can also support 200B parameter models!

For the price of a single 4090, which doesn't have enough ram to run anything I'm interested in, I can have slower cards which have cumulatively 15 times the memory and cumulatively 3.5 times the memory bandwidth.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#256
post #23

Not sure who this is aimed at? The avg programmer probably doesn’t have the gear on hand to run this at the required pace Cool nonetheless

I have a multi-GPU rig designed exactly for this purpose :) Check out r/localllama. There are literally dozens of us!

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#257

Credit where credit is due, Meta has had a fantastic commitment towards open source ML. You love to see it.

Wasn't LLaMa originally a leak that they were then forced to spin into an open source contribution?

Not to diminish the value of the contribution, but "commitment" is an interesting word choice.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even the M3 Max seems to be slower than my 3090 for LLMs that fit onto the 3090, but it’s hard to find comprehensive numbers. The primary advantage is that you can spec out more memory with the M3 Max to fit larger models, but with the exception of CodeLlama-70B today, it really seems like the trend is for models to be getting smaller and better, not bigger. Mixtral runs circles around Llama2-70B and arguably ChatGPT…

M3 Max is actually less than ideal because it peaks at 400 Gb/s for memory. What you really want is M1 or M2 Ultra, which offers up to 800 Gb/s (for comparison, RTX 3090 runs at 936 GB/s). A Mac Studio suitable for running 70B models with speeds fast enough for realtime chat can be had for ~$3K The downside of Apple's hardware at the moment is that the training ecosystem is very much focused on CUDA; llama.cpp has an…

Yep, I seriously considered a Mac Studio a few months ago when I was putting together an “AI server” for home usage, but I had my old 3090 just sitting around, and I was ready to upgrade the CPU on my gaming desktop… so then I had that desktop’s previous CPU. I just had too many parts already, and it deeply annoys me that Apple won’t put standard, user-upgradable NVMe SSDs on their desktops. Otherwise, the Mac Studio is a very appealing option for sure.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#259
post #163

I'm not very plugged into how to use these models, but I do love and pay for both ChatGPT and GitHub Copilot. How does one take a model like this (or a smaller version) and leverage it in VS Code? There's a dizzying array of GPT wrapper extensions for VS Code, many of which either seem like kind of junk (10 d/ls, no updates in a year), or just lead to another paid plan, at which point I might as well just keep my GH…

Free Bard is better than free ChatGPT... Not sure about paid versions

I'm learning Rust. It seems to me that Bard is better than OpenAI 4 I use for free at work.

Re: Meta AI releases Code Llama 70B

#260
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's aimed at OpenAI's moat. Making sure they don't accumulate too much of one. No one actually has to use this, it just needs to be clear that LLM as a service won't be super high margin because competition can simply start building on Meta's open source releases.

So. Strange as it seems, is Meta being more 'Open', than OpenAI that was created to be the 'open' option to fight off Meta and Google?

[dead]
Post reply on HN