llama VS GPTQ-for-LLaMa

> All the magic of "7B LLaMA running on a potato" seems to involve lowering precision down to f16 and then further quantizing to int4.

LLaMa weights are f16s to start out with, no lowering necessary to get to there.

You can stream weights from RAM to the GPU pretty efficiently. If you have >= 32GB ram and >=2GB vram my code here should work for you: https://github.com/gmorenz/llama/tree/gpu_offload

There's probably a cleaner version of it somewhere else. Really you should only need >= 16 GB ram, but the (meta provided) code to load the initial weights is completely unnecessarily making two copies of the weights in RAM simultaneously.

My code for this is very much not high quality, but I have a CPU + GPU + SSD combination: https://github.com/gmorenz/llama/tree/ssd

Usage instructions in the commit message: https://github.com/facebookresearch/llama/commit/5be06e56056...

At least with my hardware this runs at "[size of model]/[speed of SSD reads]" tokens per second, which (up to some possible further memory reduction so you can run larger batches at once on the same GPU) is a good as it gets when you need to read the whole model from disk each token.

At a 125GB and a 2MB/s read (largest model, what I get from my ssd) that's 60 seconds per token (1 day per 1440 words), which isn't exactly practical. Which is really the issue here, if you need to stream the model from an SSD because you don't have enough RAM, it is just a fundamentally slow process.

You could probably optimize quite a bit for batch throughput if you're ok with the latency though.

I don't know about this fork specifically, but in general yes absolutely.

Even without enough ram, you can stream model weights from disk and run at [size of model/disk read speed] seconds per token.

I'm doing that on a small GPU with this code, but it should be easy to get this working with the CPU as compute instead (and at least with my disk/CPU, I'm not even sure that it would run even slower, I think disk read would probably still be the bottleneck)

https://github.com/gmorenz/llama/tree/ssd

First I want to make it clear this is not a self promotion post. I hope many machine learning people come at me with questions or comments about this project. A little background about myself. I did work on the 4 bits quantization of LLaMA using GPTQ. (https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa). I've been studying AI in-depth for many years now.

Deploying the 60B version is a challenge though and you might need to apply 4-bit quantization with something like https://github.com/PanQiWei/AutoGPTQ or https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa . Then you can improve the inference speed by using https://github.com/turboderp/exllama .

If you prefer to use an "instruct" model à la ChatGPT (i.e. that does not need few-shot learning to output good results) you can use something like this: https://huggingface.co/TheBloke/Wizard-Vicuna-30B-Uncensored...

I use gptq-for-llama - from this https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa and Pygmalion 7B.

exllama is an optimized implementation of GPTQ-for-LLaMa, allowing you to run 4-bit quantized language models with GPU at great speeds.

With a single NVIDIA 3090 and the fastest inference branch of GPTQ-for-LLAMA https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa/tree/fastest-i..., I get a healthy 10-15 tokens per second on the 30B models. IMO GGML is great (And I totally use it) but it's still not as fast as running the models on GPU for now.

And exactly what Triton version are they comparing against? I just tried the latest version of this, and on my 4090/12900K I get 77 tokens per second for Llama 7B-128g. My own GPTQ CUDA implementation gets 151 tokens/second on the same model, same hardware. That makes it 96% faster, whereas AWQ is only 79% faster. For 30B-128g I'm currently only getting a 110% speedup over Triton compared to their 178%, but it still seems a little disingenuous to compare against their own CUDA implementation only, when they're trying to present the quantization method as being faster for inference.

Thanks for the explanation. I think some repos, like text generation webui used gptq for llama (I don't know if it's this repo or another one), anyway most repo that I saw use external things (like gptq for llama)

cd ../.. git clone https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa.git -b triton cd GPTQ-for-LLaMa pip install -r requirements.txt mkdir -p ../text-generation-webui/repositories ln -s ../../GPTQ-for-LLaMa ../text-generation-webui/repositories/GPTQ-for-LLaMa

cd repositories git clone https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa pip install -r requirements.txt

# To use the GPTQ models I need to Install GPTQ-for-LLaMa and the monkey patch mkdir repositories cd repositories git clone https://github.com/qwopqwop200/GPTQ-for-LLaMa.git -b triton cd GPTQ-for-LLaMa pip install ninja pip install -r requirements.txt cd cd text-generation-webui # download random model python download-model.py xxx/yyy # try to start the gui python server.py # It returns this warning but it runs bin /home/gm/miniconda3/envs/chat/lib/python3.10/site-packages/bitsandbytes/libbitsandbytes_cpu.so /home/gm/miniconda3/envs/chat/lib/python3.10/site-packages/bitsandbytes/cextension.py:34: UserWarning: The installed version of bitsandbytes was compiled without GPU support. 8-bit optimizers, 8-bit multiplication, and GPU quantization are unavailable. warn("The installed version of bitsandbytes was compiled without GPU support. " /home/gm/miniconda3/envs/chat/lib/python3.10/site-packages/bitsandbytes/libbitsandbytes_cpu.so: undefined symbol: cadam32bit_grad_fp32