Big Boss

64 posts

Big Boss banner
Big Boss

Big Boss

@0xBADB01E

hey boss, wanna train with me?

Motherbase Katılım Temmuz 2024
15 Takip Edilen18.6K Takipçiler
Vikram Sekar
Vikram Sekar@vikramskr·
Just completed a giant report on interconnects for a client. Wow was that a lot of work. Damn.
English
7
0
113
15.3K
Big Boss retweetledi
HIDEO_KOJIMA
HIDEO_KOJIMA@HIDEO_KOJIMA_EN·
39 years‼️
HIDEO_KOJIMA tweet media
English
366
3.3K
37.9K
576.6K
LaurieWired
LaurieWired@lauriewired·
@0xBADB01E the nice part is how…universal placement algorithms work when you stop naively assuming a flat memory pool. I welcome all the new tiers of the memory hierarchy. If only someone were working on that 😉
English
1
0
23
2K
LaurieWired
LaurieWired@lauriewired·
predicted this one early. not sure anyone believed me then
LaurieWired tweet mediaLaurieWired tweet media
English
18
42
800
55.6K
Big Boss retweetledi
Whatsup Beijing
Whatsup Beijing@BeijingWha23379·
@0xBADB01E No easy feat to write a tweet that hides all the juicy stuff while still protecting your aura
English
1
3
260
12.6K
Big Boss
Big Boss@0xBADB01E·
You really have to applaud Intel’s patent attorneys. As a former patent examiner myself I can tell you that it’s no easy feat to write an application that hides all the juicy stuff while still protecting your IP. Filing this the day after Christmas so that it releases the Thursday before Independence Day was no mistake either… Won’t say too much more on it since my posts now move the market? But this fox guy and all the other commenters have no fucking clue what they are looking at.
Underfox@Underfox3

In this week, an Intel patent application was published, revealing its proposed Cross-Batch Memory (XBM), an ultra high-bandwidth memory that offers some significant improvements over the current standard, which could be a direct competitor to HBM4 in the near future.

English
26
50
1.7K
195.2K
Big Boss
Big Boss@0xBADB01E·
@BULLOFBRITAIN Please don’t dilute the conversations around my technical posts with this lazy Claude haiku level “analysis” that oversimplifies everything I said and shills stocks with zero reasoning. Warning if you do this again I will block you and get your account taken down.
English
26
4
352
43.6K
BULL OF BRITAIN
BULL OF BRITAIN@BULLOFBRITAIN·
Two threads just got published by @0xBADB01E that changed how I think about the AI trade. Ill try my best to translate as easy as possible. > One showed inference is a LATENCY problem once models are sharded. > One showed scaleup stays COPPER and the neocloud layer is a debt treadmill. Implications: The latency between chips is the "binding constraint" for interactive inference. And his answer on whether optics fixes it? No. > Optics flap, conversion adds latency, and a latency critical blend cannot tolerate flapping links. > Copper wins short reach, and the only copper drawback (SerDes power) gets engineered around. At high batch the problem flips to memory CAPACITY. KV cache explodes past what any HBM package holds, forcing sharding across extra $40K GPUs and paying the interconnect tax again. It all ends the same, the wire and the DRAM bit win. > $CRDO - makes the smart copper cables connecting AI chips. The argument above says copper keeps this job. Direct winner. > $SMTC - makes chips that clean up signals in those connections while burning less power. The exact direction he says the industry is heading. > $ALAB / $PENG - both play the "cheaper fix" for the memory space problem: letting many chips share one big pool of memory instead of everyone buying more expensive chips. He just derived the demand for this from first principles. > $MU / Hynix / Samsung - every version of this debate ends the same way, buying more memory, despite whatever architecture wins. The one layer to be careful with are companies that borrow heavily to buy GPUs and rent them out. His math is that the hardware loses value faster than the loans get paid off, and every new chip generation restarts the problem. A business can show 80% margins and still go broke that way.
English
10
6
86
21.6K
Compounding Cash
Compounding Cash@CashCompounding·
@0xBADB01E How did mythos not come up with this 6 months ago? Seems like memory innovation has been low effort.
English
2
0
0
491
Big Boss
Big Boss@0xBADB01E·
I agree with this post whole heartedly but I’d push it even further. The interconnect IS the binding constraint for AI even more so than memory. If we want faster inference & training with better economics we are best served by designing our interconnect first and then working backwards towards the optimal chip architecture. Today’s chips weren’t really designed with this principle in mind. There is no better example than running autoregressive decode on a GPU. Despite all those reticle sized logic dies & CoWoS integration decode runs at under 20% of peak FLOPs on Blackwell, wasting silicon and burning power while waiting for memory. The naive solution has always been to increase memory bandwidth whether that’s adding more HBM or using SRAM. However, that is a vast simplification of the problem which I’ll explain later. But if you were clever you’d have realized while reading that you could feed those idle FLOPs by streaming weights over the interconnect itself. Wallah 🪄 you just discovered the idea that forms the basis behind disaggregated memory from first principles. But sadly this currently doesn’t work on Nvidia’s hardware. NVLink5 carries 1.8 TB/s against 8 TB/s of local HBM, and scale out is 80x behind that. The “pipe” is smaller than the memory at the other end and thus leads to worst token/sec if its relied upon. But we get an interesting lemma out of this which is that remote memory is only as fast as the interconnect. Therefore you must balance the pipe for the memory it attaches to. SRAM needs an 80 TB/s link, HBM needs 2+ TB/s, and LPDDR gets away with a couple hundred GB/s. So Nvidia selling a rack of 72 GPUs, each GPU’s memory is pretty segregated. The core idea is still sound though but this raises a question, why would Nvidia build a fabric that’s high bandwidth and high latency leading to memory access being segregated per GPU? It’s because they were optimizing for training over inference. Training is dominated by collectives on huge tensors, and a couple microseconds of latency on a huge all reduce operation is just noise so the bandwidth gains justify the latency tradeoff. But more importantly, this also works because it matches what the chip is good at. GPUs are great at hiding latency with occupancy (also what allows them to be OK for training) but bandwidth is the only thing warp switching can’t create. You can justify a 224G PAM4 + FEC with overhead when you have a chip that’s designed to be latency tolerant as well. It’s a latency tolerant fabric for a latency tolerant chip. Maybe a good design for training but inference inverts this completely. Now everyone knows decode is bandwidth bound so you might assume again that more/higher BW memory and thus higher BW interconnects are necessary. However, it’s the exact opposite and the name of the game is actually lower latency and that’s why despite having high bandwidth memory MFU on decode is still so low and also why I made the point earlier that the interconnect is MORE important than the memory itself as well as the chip architecture. In part two I will explain why lower latency interconnects are not just ideal for inference but also allow you to get away with a smaller cheaper memory and a simpler chip architecture.
Big Boss tweet media
outside five sigma@jwt0625

chips get all the love but the interconnects across all levels from c2c to rack-to-rack are as important, and many chip makers are sleeping on it until very recently. Even most interconnects people just want it to be as transparent as possible, just send and receive the bits with lower error rates and lower energy per bit, wrong long-term direction imo. Interconnects are part of the living creature, so many things happening in your blood vessels in addition to just moving stuff, and your axons do much more than carrying spikes. People do not appreciate interconnects, smaller volume, poor margin, messy ecosystem, manual process, it's been a spiral of grinding, and it is largely invisible. How often do you see people tearing down transceivers and die shot of DSP chips vs logic chips? How often do you see high res pictures of all the connector's gold fingers on the NVL72 cartridge? Because it sounds boring, it's just making contacts, shoving electrons and photons, what a simple problem. But that is deceiving, and theres so much to it. You might want 576 to begin with, had to cut down to 288, then to 144, and finally to 72, and that barely worked first time. You are entering the domain of analog and mixed signaling, you are fighting copper real estate with power delivery, you are getting impedance mismatch and reflections and interference at every stupid interfaces, your optical components' and connectors' backreflection is making your laser mode hop.. And we are not even going into the thermal and strain-stress, the reliability of how many times you can actually mate your connector, the horrible jobs people are doing across the stack from science-project-originated photonic PDKs to hand cleaved laser dies to optical engines to rack manufacturing, on spec-ing out the requirements, the tolerances.. On top of all these, people thinking about where the bits should be going and people who know what the bits have to go thru are two totally different groups of people. But it is shifting, pluggable volumes shipped are doubling and tripling for scale-out, scale-up domain asks for much higher bw than scale-out, and interconnects are inevitable even if you cram as much compute and memory onto a single wafer. People will see it always has been interconnects, the chips people have already been doing it on the chips, that you can sort it out with your chip designers and foundries, and now you need to work with more people to sort it out from chips to boards/trays to racks to pods to data halls and data centers. These people speak very different languages and care about very different things, and it will take a lot of effort to pull order out of all the chaos. At the end of the day, it is such a crazy problem to work on, such a beautiful thing to make, millions of amps of current flipping 1e20 of flops, sextillions of photons carrying thousands of terabits per second, a few tons of copper, tens of thousands of fibers totally few hundred kilometers, one scale-up domain. You absolutely need a group of people that appreciate the beauty and care about the craft behind the grinding to make it together.

English
50
86
1.2K
360.1K
bubble boi
bubble boi@bubbleboi·
I hope this isn’t why markets are selling off today….
Big Boss@0xBADB01E

So following these principles here is the architecture that falls out and it’s quite different than what is thought to be optimal today. Starting with the memory: LPDDR6 tops out around 14.4 Gb/s per pin. We would want to as many channels as the die’s edge can carry. If we can fit 24 channels, that’s 576 data pins, and you get ~1 TB/s per chip with 192 GB of storage. Same as the b200 in size but about an a100 in bandwidth. But remember that LPDDR access latency is ~100 ns which is about the same as HBM. So streaming weights from LPDDR costs you nothing on latency and we just give up per package bandwidth, and remember our pipelining already collapsed that requirement. Now work backwards to compute. Tokens/sec = ~aggregate BW / bytes touched per token, and at batch 64 in FP4 every delivered byte wants ~256 FLOPs. 1 TB/s × 256 = ~260 TF of FP4. Size ~280 TF for some headroom and stop! That’s all we need, the rest of the alpha is in latency tuning not flops. Now process node, again using first principles thinking. On TSMC N6 that MAC array would be about 30 mm^2. The rest of the die goes to SRAM buffers, 24 LPDDR PHYs, and 56 lanes of plain 32 GT/s NRZ SerDes PCIe 5.0 transceivers, nothing exotic. Because we didn’t provision more flops we can provision what we really need which is ports. If we do 7 ports × x8 we can get a full mesh across 8 chips with ~224 GB/s any to any ops, sized for 8 KB activations instead of 100 MB gradients. Approximate Total Area: ~144 mm^2, ~180W with the DRAM. Fucking Mobile SoC level economics. And we get away without a crazy process node. N3 shrinks your logic, but that’s actually the one thing this die barely has. SRAM stopped scaling and the PHYs and SerDes are analog so they don’t shrink at all. An N3 port shrinks ~20% of the floorplan, and saves maybe 10-15W, but doubles the cost on a small die that already has beautiful *chefs kiss* 👨‍🍳💋 yield. Now do the node math: 8 chips (b/c full mesh w/ 7 ports) = 8 TB/s aggregate BW, 1.5 TB total of memory, and ~1.44 kW. A B200 inside an NVL72 is 8 TB/s, 192 GB, ~1.67 kW all in. So we are basically neck and neck on BW with a b200 with slightly lower power because we have more chips connected with quicker interconnects allowing them to act as a single unit. If we scale to the rack level at 72 nodes, that 576 chips, 576 TB/s which is again the same aggregate bandwidth as a GB200 NVL72, so approximately the same tokens/sec by construction but with ~104 kW of power against ~120-130 and 110 TB of memory against 13.8 TB of the NVL72. So in summary 4.5x less compute silicon, zero HBM, zero CoWoS, zero leading-edge nodes and still token/watt ~20% better. So what’s stopping everyone from doing this? The number I told you hold whether you want to believe it or not and get even more competitive with longer reasoning chains or agentic workloads because as you scale those the all reduces now sits on the critical path of every token and on a 30 ns link with a full mesh that’s orders of magnitudes of token throughput improvements over Nvidia’s stack. Counterintuitively the link latency, not the chip architecture, decides your memory, logic, and everything else! Thanks for reading if you made it this far.

English
14
2
220
48.9K
Big Boss
Big Boss@0xBADB01E·
@AWar1586398 I’m big boss the legendary soldier. They need me.
English
3
0
24
1.9K
A War
A War@AWar1586398·
@0xBADB01E If they were going to cap you, you’d already be capped.
English
1
0
4
2K
Big Boss
Big Boss@0xBADB01E·
Everyone wondering why I posted about that architecture doesn’t realize that we have something a lot more exciting and consequential in my back pocket. If I released that it would probably wipe trillions of dollars off of the global stock exchanges. Most likely will never see the light of day as it’s out of my hands now.
English
44
5
415
55.8K
brrrrrrrrrrrrr
brrrrrrrrrrrrr@wiseguy_co·
@0xBADB01E If it will never see the light of day, then how could it be exciting?
English
1
0
1
1.9K
Big Boss
Big Boss@0xBADB01E·
@MagicofAzi Sadly we don’t want AGI inside every drone and missile China makes
English
5
0
28
2.3K
Azi
Azi@MagicofAzi·
@0xBADB01E do humanity a favor and share it! intelligence seeks to be free of central reigns
English
1
0
7
2.3K