MLPerf Inference Benchmark

Machine-learning (ML) hardware and software system demand is burgeoning. Driven by ML applications, the number of different ML inference systems has exploded. Over 100 organizations are building ML inference chips, and the systems that incorporate existing models span at least three orders of magnitude in power consumption and five orders of magnitude in performance; they range from embedded devices to data-center solutions. Fueling the hardware are a dozen or more software frameworks and libraries. The myriad combinations of ML hardware and ML software make assessing ML-system performance in an architecture-neutral, representative, and reproducible manner challenging. There is a clear need for industry-wide standard ML benchmarking and evaluation criteria. MLPerf Inference answers that call. In this paper, we present our benchmarking method for evaluating ML inference systems. Driven by more than 30 organizations as well as more than 200 ML engineers and practitioners, MLPerf prescribes a set of rules and best practices to ensure comparability across systems with wildly differing architectures. The first call for submissions garnered more than 600 reproducible inference-performance measurements from 14 organizations, representing over 30 systems that showcase a wide range of capabilities. The submissions attest to the benchmark's flexibility and adaptability.Comment: ISCA 202

Batch Size Influence on Performance of Graphic and Tensor Processing Units during Training and Inference Phases

The impact of the maximally possible batch size (for the better runtime) on performance of graphic processing units (GPU) and tensor processing units (TPU) during training and inference phases is investigated. The numerous runs of the selected deep neural network (DNN) were performed on the standard MNIST and Fashion-MNIST datasets. The significant speedup was obtained even for extremely low-scale usage of Google TPUv2 units (8 cores only) in comparison to the quite powerful GPU NVIDIA Tesla K80 card with the speedup up to 10x for training stage (without taking into account the overheads) and speedup up to 2x for prediction stage (with and without taking into account overheads). The precise speedup values depend on the utilization level of TPUv2 units and increase with the increase of the data volume under processing, but for the datasets used in this work (MNIST and Fashion-MNIST with images of sizes 28x28) the speedup was observed for batch sizes >512 images for training phase and >40 000 images for prediction phase. It should be noted that these results were obtained without detriment to the prediction accuracy and loss that were equal for both GPU and TPU runs up to the 3rd significant digit for MNIST dataset, and up to the 2nd significant digit for Fashion-MNIST dataset.Comment: 10 pages, 7 figures, 2 table

DeepOBS: A Deep Learning Optimizer Benchmark Suite

Because the choice and tuning of the optimizer affects the speed, and ultimately the performance of deep learning, there is significant past and recent research in this area. Yet, perhaps surprisingly, there is no generally agreed-upon protocol for the quantitative and reproducible evaluation of optimization strategies for deep learning. We suggest routines and benchmarks for stochastic optimization, with special focus on the unique aspects of deep learning, such as stochasticity, tunability and generalization. As the primary contribution, we present DeepOBS, a Python package of deep learning optimization benchmarks. The package addresses key challenges in the quantitative assessment of stochastic optimizers, and automates most steps of benchmarking. The library includes a wide and extensible set of ready-to-use realistic optimization problems, such as training Residual Networks for image classification on ImageNet or character-level language prediction models, as well as popular classics like MNIST and CIFAR-10. The package also provides realistic baseline results for the most popular optimizers on these test problems, ensuring a fair comparison to the competition when benchmarking new optimizers, and without having to run costly experiments. It comes with output back-ends that directly produce LaTeX code for inclusion in academic publications. It supports TensorFlow and is available open source.Comment: Accepted at ICLR 2019. 9 pages, 3 figures, 2 table