Found out about air_llm, https://github.com/lyogavin/Anima/tree/main/air_llm, where it loads one layer at a time, allow each layer to be 1.6GB for a 70b with 80 layers. theres about 30mb for kv cache, and i’m not sure where the rest goes.

works with HF out of the box too apparently. The weaknesses appear to be ctxlen, and its gonna be slow, but anyway, anyone want to try goliath 120B unquant?

  • Spirited_Employee_61@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If we can fit 1 layer at a time, can we do 3 or 4 at a time? A bit bigger but a bit faster than 1 at a time. Or am I dreaming?

    • ron_krugman@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That doesn’t make much of a difference. You still have to transfer the whole model to the GPU for ever single inference step. The GPU only saves you time if you can load the model (or parts of it) once and then do lots of inference steps.

  • Tiny_Arugula_5648@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    one of those cases where proving something can be done doesn’t make it useful. This has to be one of the least efficient ways to do inferencing. Like the people who got Doom running on a HP printer. Great you did it but it’s the worst possible version.

  • watkykjynaaier@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Given my M1 Max’s 400GB/s memory bandwidth, what would be the bottleneck for this on Apple Silicon? Disk speed? Is it possible to get this running on Metal?

    • fallingdowndizzyvr@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There’s no point to it. Since if it’s too big to fit in RAM, it would be disk i/o that would be the limiter. Then it wouldn’t matter if you had 400GB/s of memory bandwidth or 40GB/s. Since the disk i/o would be the bottleneck.

  • petitmottin@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Would you choose speed over quality? Personally I prefer quality. So this is a great project! Because in real life, quality usually takes time…

  • xinranli@alien.top
    cake
    B
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This seems like a very brilliant and almost obvious idea, is there a reason why this method wasn’t a thing before? Besides the PCIe bandwidth and storage speed requirements.

    • fallingdowndizzyvr@alien.topB
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because it wouldn’t be any faster than doing CPU inference. Since both CPUs and GPUs are already waiting around for data to process. It’s that i/o that’s the limiter. This changes none of that.

      • radianart@alien.topB
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is here a better way to use bigger models than can fit in RAM\VRAM? I’d want to try 70b or maybe even 120b but I only have 32\8gb.

        • TheTerrasque@alien.topB
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          70b? Q4, llama.cpp, some layers on gpu.

          Might need to run Linux to get the system ram usage low enough

  • sdmat@alien.topB
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This technique is actually really useful for batch processing.

    I.e. if you run 100 generations and reuse the layer while it is loaded that will go much faster than the total serial time.