Live data from Hacker News

MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

ai.facebook.com

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#31
post #17
post #14

It's curious why nobody is selling these systems yet

Probably the software needs to be optimized for the hw and also the hw may not be general purpose enough even if offered. People demand nvidia because cuda is very optimized for their gpus and many AI software use cuda

Competing against NVIDIA must be exhausting.

You come up with a clever ASIC that is better than their current GPU for your workload… and by the time it comes out they’ve released the next year’s chip that just has like 50% more memory bandwidth or something ridiculous like that, and beats you by pure grunt.

“No replacement for displacement” actually seems to be true in compute.

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#32
post #23

This looks like a customized ASIC specializing solely in recommendation systems possibly focused on ads ranking >We found that GPUs were not always optimal for running Meta’s specific recommendation workloads at the levels of efficiency required at our scale. Our solution to this challenge was to design a family of recommendation-specific Meta Training and Inference Accelerator (MTIA) ASICs.

What a tragic waste of human effort and potential.

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#33
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does a training specialized chip function? Forward mode is simple, just a dot product machine. But how do you accelerate backprop on hardware? Does it have the vector Jacobian transformation lookup logic and table baked into hardware?

Mostly you need to be able to stash intermediate products computed in the forward phase so that you can access them in the backward phase. This requires more memory, more memory bandwidth, more transpose, and also, training usually operates at slightly higher precision (bf16 instead of int8 as one example).

What about the autodiff/VJP lookup table? What's the overhead like for those?

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW, you're comparing a training-specialized chip to an inference-specialized chip. It'd be more apples to apples to compare to TPU v4 lite, but I can't find that chip's details anywhere beyond some mentions in the TPU v4 paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.01433

How does a training specialized chip function? Forward mode is simple, just a dot product machine. But how do you accelerate backprop on hardware? Does it have the vector Jacobian transformation lookup logic and table baked into hardware?

[flagged]

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#36
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly you need to be able to stash intermediate products computed in the forward phase so that you can access them in the backward phase. This requires more memory, more memory bandwidth, more transpose, and also, training usually operates at slightly higher precision (bf16 instead of int8 as one example).

What about the autodiff/VJP lookup table? What's the overhead like for those?

I think it's helpful to categorize the things that go into an ML accelerator as those that are big picture architectural - things like memory bandwidth and sizes, support for big operations like transposition, etc., -- and those that are fixed-function optimizations. In all of these systems, there's a compiler that's responsible for taking higher-level things and compiling them down to those low-level operations. And that includes the derivatives used in backprop - they just get mapped to the same plus a few more primitive operations. While there are few more fixed functions you need to add for loss functions and some derivatives, probably the largest difference is that you need to support transpose (and that you need all that extra memory & bandwidth to keep those intermediate products around in order to backprop on them)

This paper has a nice summary of the challenges of going from an inference-only TPU to the inference-capable TPUv2: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9351692

Look for the section "CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF BUILDING ML HARDWARE"

But then things change more when you want to start supporting embeddings, so Google's TPUs have included a "sparse core" to separately handle those (the lookup and memory use patterns are drastically different from that of the typical dense matrix operations used for non-embedding layers) since TPUv2: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2304.01433.pdf

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#37
post #14

It's curious why nobody is selling these systems yet

For the same reason why it took a long time for crypto mining accelerators to actually ship. It is more profitable to keep them for yourself.

This is a popular myth. Bitcoin asic's were 'shipping' in 2012/2013.

Some companies definitely played games and mined with the asic's themselves (and then shipped those used asic's)... but in general, it was always a lot more profitable to sell the shovels than it was to mine the gold.

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#39
Can OpenXLA/IREE target it? Supposedly PyTorch 2.0's big shift was a switch to these new systems. Curiosity to know if that's actually happened here.

Side note, the chip says Korea on it & I this expected it was Samsung... But it's TSMC made chips? What's up with that?

Re: MTIA v1: Meta’s first-generation AI inference accelerator

#40
post #39

Can OpenXLA/IREE target it? Supposedly PyTorch 2.0's big shift was a switch to these new systems. Curiosity to know if that's actually happened here. Side note, the chip says Korea on it & I this expected it was Samsung... But it's TSMC made chips? What's up with that?

Probably a Korean packaging company
Post reply on HN