NVIDIA / NVIDIA/nvmath-python

Low GEMM Performance on Hopper GPU with Small M Shapes

Open
#21 2 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Dominant language
Cython
Stars
601
Forks
46
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Hi,

Thank you for the great library! I’m observing some unexpected performance with GEMM on Hopper GPUs when using small M dimensions. I followed the example in example14_autotune.py.

Compared to the PyTorch implementation, the performance is significantly lower — around 30% of the expected TFLOPS and memory bandwidth utilization.

Image

Not sure I am correctly using the API — I would greatly appreciate any suggestions.

Environment:
• GPU: H200
• CUDA: 12.8
• PyTorch: 2.6.0
• nvmath-python: 0.3.0

Benchmark code:

import argparse

import torch
import nvmath
from triton.testing import do_bench


def profile(m, n, k, dtype):
    device = torch.device("cuda")
    assert isinstance(device, torch.device)

    X = torch.randn(m, k, device=device, dtype=dtype)
    Y = torch.randn(n, k, device=device, dtype=dtype)
    
    _torch_gemm = lambda: torch.matmul(X, Y)
    
    mm = nvmath.linalg.advanced.Matmul(X, Y)
    
    mm.plan(preferences={"limit":1000})
    mm.autotune(iterations=1000)
    
    # print(mm.algorithms[0].capabilities)
    _nvmath_gemm = lambda: mm.execute()
    
    t_torch = do_bench(_torch_gemm)
    t_nvmath = do_bench(_nvmath_gemm)
    
    return t_torch, t_nvmath


if __name__ == "__main__":
    parser = argparse.ArgumentParser(description="GEMM profile")
    parser.add_argument("--m", type=int, default=4096)
    parser.add_argument("--n", type=int, default=4096)
    parser.add_argument("--k", type=int, default=4096)
    args = parser.parse_args()

    print("Provider,Operation,dtype,m,n,k,Runtime,GB/s,GFLOPs")
    
    for dtype in [torch.float16, torch.bfloat16]:
        t_torch, t_nvmath = profile(args.m, args.n, args.k, dtype)

        m = args.m
        n = args.n
        k = args.k

        torch_mem_bd = 2 * (m * n + n * k + m * k) * 1e3 / t_torch / 1e9
        torch_gflops = 2 * m * n * k * 1e3 / t_torch / 1e9
        nv_mem_bd = 2 * (m * n + n * k + m * k) * 1e3 / t_nvmath / 1e9
        nv_gflops = 2 * m * n * k * 1e3 / t_nvmath / 1e9
        
        print(f"TORCH,0,{dtype},{args.m},{args.n},{args.k},{t_torch},{torch_mem_bd},{torch_gflops}")
        print(f"NVMATH,0,{dtype},{args.m},{args.n},{args.k},{t_nvmath},{nv_mem_bd},{nv_gflops}")

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Reproduce the comparison using examples/linalg/advanced/matmul/example14_autotune.py and the supplied profile benchmark on the stated H200 and CUDA 12.8 environment. Compare nvmath Matmul planning and autotuning with torch.matmul for small M shapes; done means the performance gap is explained and the correct API usage or required fix is documented.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python, pytorch
Domain
performance
Issue type
Bug
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
35/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.