|
|
|
|
|
|
by getmeinrn
1058 days ago
|
|
|
How do you do science on LLMs? I would imagine that is super important, given their broad impact on the social fabric. But they're non-deterministic, very expensive to train, and subjective. I understand we have some benchmarks for roughly understanding a model's competence. But is there any work in the area of understanding, through repeatable experiments, why LLMs behave how they do? Do we care? |
|
|
GPUs really aren't that. They're massively parallel vector processors that turn out to be generally better than CPUs at running these models, but they're still not the ideal chip for running LLMs. That would be a large even more specialized parallel processor where almost all the silicon is dedicated to running exactly the types of operations used in large LLMs and that natively supports quantization formats such as those found in the ggml/llama.cpp world. Being able to natively run and train on those formats would allow gigantic 100B+ models to be run with more reasonable amounts of RAM and at a higher speed due to memory bandwidth constraints.
These chips, when they arrive, will be a lot cheaper than GPUs when compared in dollars per LLM performance. They'll be available for rent in the cloud and for purchase as accelerators.
I'd be utterly shocked if lots of chip companies don't have projects working on these chips, since at this point it's clear that LLMs are going to become a permanent fixture of computing.