intel-extension-for-pytorch VS openai-whisper-cpu

OK I found it. Looks like they use SYCL (which for some reason they've rebranded to DPC++): https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-pytorch/tree/v2...

Just to point out it does, kind of: https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-pytorch

I've asked before if they'll merge it back into PyTorch main and include it in the CI, not sure if they've done that yet.

Intel already has a working GPGPU stack, using oneAPI/SYCL.

They also have arguably pretty good OpenCL support, as well as downstream support for PyTorch and Tensorflow using their custom extensions https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-tensorflow and https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-pytorch which are actively developed and just recently brought up-to-date with upstream releases.

https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-pytorch :

> Intel® Extension for PyTorch extends PyTorch* with up-to-date features optimizations for an extra performance boost on Intel hardware. Optimizations take advantage of AVX-512 Vector Neural Network Instructions (AVX512 VNNI) and Intel® Advanced Matrix Extensions (Intel® AMX) on Intel CPUs as well as Intel Xe Matrix Extensions (XMX) AI engines on Intel discrete GPUs. Moreover, through PyTorch* xpu device, Intel® Extension for PyTorch* provides easy GPU acceleration for Intel discrete GPUs with PyTorch*

https://pytorch.org/blog/celebrate-pytorch-2.0/ :

> As part of the PyTorch 2.0 compilation stack, TorchInductor CPU backend optimization brings notable performance improvements via graph compilation over the PyTorch eager mode.

The TorchInductor CPU backend is sped up by leveraging the technologies from the Intel® Extension for PyTorch for Conv/GEMM ops with post-op fusion and weight prepacking, and PyTorch ATen CPU kernels for memory-bound ops with explicit vectorization on top of OpenMP-based thread parallelization*

DLRS Deep Learning Reference Stack: https://intel.github.io/stacks/dlrs/index.html

Install intel extensions for pytorch using docker. https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-pytorch

There is: https://github.com/intel/intel-extension-for-pytorch for intel cards on GPUs, but I would assume this doesn't extend to integraded graphics

Nonetheless, this issue might be relevant for your case.

I'm not sure where the disdain for ROCm is coming from, but tensorflow-rocm and the rocm pytorch container were fairly easy to setup and use from scratch once I got the correct Linux kernel installed along with the rest of the necessary ROCm components needed to use tensorflow and pytorch for rocm. TBF Intel Extension for Tensorflow wasn't too bad to setup either (except for the lack of float16 mixed precision training support, that was definitely a pain point to not be able to have), but Intel Extension for Pytorch for Intel GPUs (a.k.a. IPEX-GPU) however, has been a PITA to use for my i5 11400H iGPU NOT because the iGPU itself is slow, BUT because the current i915 driver in the mainline linux kernel simply doesn't work with IPEX-GPU (every script that I've ran ends up freezing when using even the i915 drivers as recent as Kernel version 6), and when I ended up installing drivers that were meant for the Arc GPUs that finally got IPEX-GPUs to work, I ended up with even more issues such as sh*tty FP64 emulation support that basically meant I had to do some really janky workarounds for things to not break while FP64 emulation was enabled (disabling was simply not an option for me, long story short). And yea unlike Intel, both Nvidia AND AMD actually do support FP64 instructions AND FLOAT16 mixed precision training natively on their GPUs so that one doesn't have to worry about running into "unsupported FP64 instructions" and "unsupported training modes" no matter what software they're running on those GPUs.

I feel the same.

For example some stats from Whisper [0] (audio transcoding) show the following for the medium model (see other models in the link):

---

GPU medium fp32 Linear 1.7s

CPU medium fp32 nn.Linear 60.7

CPU medium qint8 (quant) nn.Linear 23.1

---

So the same model runs 35.7 times faster on GPU, and compared to an CPU-optimized model still 13.6.

I was expecting around an order or magnitude of improvement. Then again, I do not know if in the case of this article the entire model was in the GPU, or just a fraction of it (22 layers), which might explain the result.

[0] https://github.com/MiscellaneousStuff/openai-whisper-cpu

According to https://github.com/MiscellaneousStuff/openai-whisper-cpu the medium model needs 1.7 seconds to transcribe 30 seconds of audio when run on a GPU.

There is a very simple method built-in to PyTorch which can give you over 3x speed improvement for the large model, which you could also combine with the method proposed in this post. https://github.com/MiscellaneousStuff/openai-whisper-cpu

For CPU inference, model quantization is a very easy to apply method with great average speedups which is already built-in to PyTorch. For example, I applied dynamic quantization to the OpenAI Whisper model (speech recognition) across a range of model sizes (ranging from tiny which had 39M params to large which had 1.5B params). Refer to the below table for performance increases:

GitHub