• Home
  • Technology
  • Gaming
  • Entertainment
  • World & Business
  • Science
  • Sports
  • AI
HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
  • HomeTechnologyGamingEntertainmentWorld & BusinessScienceSportsAI
    • Home
    • Technology
    • Gaming
    • Entertainment
    • World & Business
    • Science
    • Sports
    • AI
    AI
    Announcement

    A claimed 9.65-second NanoGPT training run awaits review

    The contributor says they adapted CPU-based work from an earlier pull request and submitted their own for review.

    PL
    C🎉
    AP
    4 Sources, ,

    TLDR

    A NanoGPT contributor says they trained the model in 9.65 seconds by adapting earlier work that ran a CPU model concurrently. They say that work cut the reported record from 39.9 to 21.5 seconds. The contributor submitted a pull request for the new run, but says all the records remain subject to review and CPU use during runs is a gray area for nanoGPT.

    Combined views

    35.5K

    4 Sources, first seen 9h ago

    Combined views

    35.5K

    4 Sources, first seen 9h ago

    488 likes
    Today's Rank

    #7

    Today's Rank

    #7

    9h ago
    first seen 9h ago
    488 likes
    17 comments
    224 saves
    66 reposts
    17 comments
    224 saves
    66 reposts

    4 Sources

    @DevenPzakI think I just trained NanoGPT in 9.65 seconds!? Yesterday, @hermanbrunborg used a connected longest exact match model, trained concurrently on CPU, to get the nanoGPT record from 39.9 seconds to 21.5 seconds, in an impressive open PR. By adapting their work, and generalizing the CPU model to a larger share of the tokens, I got the record down to 9.65 seconds, and submitted the PR this morning. I built on three open PRs, in addition to my contributions: the main basis for my generalization was from @hermanbrunborg, and additional work from @nthngdy, @cyrusghane, and Daniel Monroe. Their engineering is extremely impressive. Of course, all of our records are still subject to review. As I mentioned in my comment on Herman‘s PR (and in my own PR description), CPU usage is a gray area in nanoGPT. Their PR was the first to discover a clever way to effectively use CPU during the run, so I’m looking forward to the official reviews. This was another very fun challenge! Particularly (potentially) breaking the 10 second barrier yesterday. So much engineering tact is yet to be explored. Huge shoutout to the three authors of the PRs for their innovations. @hermanbrunborg - I will also be at stanford for the weekend along with some of my cofounders, and sf for a couple days after, would love to chat more IRL, if you’d be open 🙂9h
    @apartoviHoly cow! Just four days ago, these guys set the world record at 39.9 seconds. Now it might be under 10 seconds?!7h
    @charles_irlRT @DevenPzak: I think I just trained NanoGPT in 9.65 seconds!? Yesterday, @hermanbrunborg used a connected longest exact match model, tra…7h
    @percyliangRT @DevenPzak: I think I just trained NanoGPT in 9.65 seconds!? Yesterday, @hermanbrunborg used a connected longest exact match model, tra…1h
    Featured Source

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    Sentiment

    Positive——Negative

    Summary

    Not enough discussion yet.

    No sentiment analysis available yet.

    4 Sources

    @DevenPzakI think I just trained NanoGPT in 9.65 seconds!? Yesterday, @hermanbrunborg used a connected longest exact match model, trained concurrently on CPU, to get the nanoGPT record from 39.9 seconds to 21.5 seconds, in an impressive open PR. By adapting their work, and generalizing the CPU model to a larger share of the tokens, I got the record down to 9.65 seconds, and submitted the PR this morning. I built on three open PRs, in addition to my contributions: the main basis for my generalization was from @hermanbrunborg, and additional work from @nthngdy, @cyrusghane, and Daniel Monroe. Their engineering is extremely impressive. Of course, all of our records are still subject to review. As I mentioned in my comment on Herman‘s PR (and in my own PR description), CPU usage is a gray area in nanoGPT. Their PR was the first to discover a clever way to effectively use CPU during the run, so I’m looking forward to the official reviews. This was another very fun challenge! Particularly (potentially) breaking the 10 second barrier yesterday. So much engineering tact is yet to be explored. Huge shoutout to the three authors of the PRs for their innovations. @hermanbrunborg - I will also be at stanford for the weekend along with some of my cofounders, and sf for a couple days after, would love to chat more IRL, if you’d be open 🙂9h
    @apartoviHoly cow! Just four days ago, these guys set the world record at 39.9 seconds. Now it might be under 10 seconds?!7h
    @charles_irlRT @DevenPzak: I think I just trained NanoGPT in 9.65 seconds!? Yesterday, @hermanbrunborg used a connected longest exact match model, tra…7h
    @percyliangRT @DevenPzak: I think I just trained NanoGPT in 9.65 seconds!? Yesterday, @hermanbrunborg used a connected longest exact match model, tra…1h