Note
Go to the end to download the full example code.
torch.compile End-to-End Tutorial#
Author: William Wen
torch.compile is the new way to speed up your PyTorch code!
torch.compile makes PyTorch code run faster by
JIT-compiling PyTorch code into optimized kernels,
while requiring minimal code changes.
This tutorial covers an end-to-end example of training and evaluating a
real model with torch.compile. For a gentle introduction to torch.compile,
please check out the introduction to torch.compile tutorial.
Required pip Dependencies
torch >= 2.0torchvision
How to apply
torch.compileto a real modeltorch.compilespeedups on a real modeltorch.compile’s first few iterations are expected to be slower due to compilation overhead
# NOTE: a modern NVIDIA GPU (H100, A100, or V100) is recommended for this tutorial in
# order to reproduce the speedup numbers shown below and documented elsewhere.
import torch
import warnings
gpu_ok = False
if torch.cuda.is_available():
device_cap = torch.cuda.get_device_capability()
if device_cap in ((7, 0), (8, 0), (9, 0)):
gpu_ok = True
if not gpu_ok:
warnings.warn(
"GPU is not NVIDIA V100, A100, or H100. Speedup numbers may be lower "
"than expected."
)
/var/lib/workspace/intermediate_source/torch_compile_full_example.py:51: UserWarning:
GPU is not NVIDIA V100, A100, or H100. Speedup numbers may be lower than expected.
Let’s demonstrate how using torch.compile can speed up a real model.
We will compare standard eager mode and
torch.compile by evaluating and training a torchvision model on random data.
Before we start, we need to define some utility functions.
# Returns the result of running `fn()` and the time it took for `fn()` to run,
# in seconds. We use CUDA events and synchronization for the most accurate
# measurements.
def timed(fn):
start = torch.cuda.Event(enable_timing=True)
end = torch.cuda.Event(enable_timing=True)
start.record()
result = fn()
end.record()
torch.cuda.synchronize()
return result, start.elapsed_time(end) / 1000
# Generates random input and targets data for the model, where `b` is
# batch size.
def generate_data(b):
return (
torch.randn(b, 3, 128, 128).to().cuda(),
torch.randint(1000, (b,)).cuda(),
)
N_ITERS = 10
from torchvision.models import densenet121
def init_model():
return densenet121().cuda()
First, let’s compare inference.
Note that in the call to torch.compile, we have the additional
mode argument, which we will discuss below.
model = init_model()
# Note that we generally recommend directly compiling a torch.nn.Module by calling
# its .compile() method.
model_opt = init_model()
model_opt.compile(mode="reduce-overhead")
inp = generate_data(16)[0]
with torch.no_grad():
print("eager:", timed(lambda: model(inp))[1])
print("compile:", timed(lambda: model_opt(inp))[1])
eager: 0.3619266662597656
/usr/local/lib/python3.10/dist-packages/torch/backends/cuda/__init__.py:131: UserWarning:
Please use the new API settings to control TF32 behavior, such as torch.backends.cudnn.conv.fp32_precision = 'tf32' or torch.backends.cuda.matmul.fp32_precision = 'ieee'. Old settings, e.g, torch.backends.cuda.matmul.allow_tf32 = True, torch.backends.cudnn.allow_tf32 = True, allowTF32CuDNN() and allowTF32CuBLAS() will be deprecated after Pytorch 2.9. Please see https://pytorch.org/docs/main/notes/cuda.html#tensorfloat-32-tf32-on-ampere-and-later-devices (Triggered internally at /pytorch/aten/src/ATen/Context.cpp:80.)
/usr/local/lib/python3.10/dist-packages/torch/_inductor/compile_fx.py:312: UserWarning:
TensorFloat32 tensor cores for float32 matrix multiplication available but not enabled. Consider setting `torch.set_float32_matmul_precision('high')` for better performance.
compile: 50.57776171875
Notice that torch.compile takes a lot longer to complete
compared to eager. This is because torch.compile compiles
the model into optimized kernels as it executes. In our example, the
structure of the model doesn’t change, and so recompilation is not
needed. So if we run our optimized model several more times, we should
see a significant improvement compared to eager.
eager_times = []
for i in range(N_ITERS):
inp = generate_data(16)[0]
with torch.no_grad():
_, eager_time = timed(lambda: model(inp))
eager_times.append(eager_time)
print(f"eager eval time {i}: {eager_time}")
print("~" * 10)
compile_times = []
for i in range(N_ITERS):
inp = generate_data(16)[0]
with torch.no_grad():
_, compile_time = timed(lambda: model_opt(inp))
compile_times.append(compile_time)
print(f"compile eval time {i}: {compile_time}")
print("~" * 10)
import numpy as np
eager_med = np.median(eager_times)
compile_med = np.median(compile_times)
speedup = eager_med / compile_med
assert speedup > 1
print(
f"(eval) eager median: {eager_med}, compile median: {compile_med}, speedup: {speedup}x"
)
print("~" * 10)
eager eval time 0: 0.018312192916870116
eager eval time 1: 0.016891904830932617
eager eval time 2: 0.016657407760620118
eager eval time 3: 0.016507904052734376
eager eval time 4: 0.016700416564941405
eager eval time 5: 0.016507904052734376
eager eval time 6: 0.0175994873046875
eager eval time 7: 0.016518144607543944
eager eval time 8: 0.016533504486083983
eager eval time 9: 0.016550912857055664
~~~~~~~~~~
compile eval time 0: 0.0601302719116211
compile eval time 1: 0.007836671829223632
compile eval time 2: 0.008332287788391114
compile eval time 3: 0.007493631839752197
compile eval time 4: 0.007501823902130127
compile eval time 5: 0.00749567985534668
compile eval time 6: 0.007477248191833496
compile eval time 7: 0.007488512039184571
compile eval time 8: 0.007490560054779053
compile eval time 9: 0.007486464023590088
~~~~~~~~~~
(eval) eager median: 0.016604160308837893, compile median: 0.007494655847549438, speedup: 2.2154666800700435x
~~~~~~~~~~
And indeed, we can see that running our model with torch.compile
results in a significant speedup. Speedup mainly comes from reducing Python overhead and
GPU read/writes, and so the observed speedup may vary on factors such as model
architecture and batch size. For example, if a model’s architecture is simple
and the amount of data is large, then the bottleneck would be
GPU compute and the observed speedup may be less significant.
You may also see different speedup results depending on the chosen mode
argument. The "reduce-overhead" mode uses CUDA graphs to further reduce
the overhead of Python. For your own models,
you may need to experiment with different modes to maximize speedup. You can
read more about modes here.
You may might also notice that the second time we run our model with torch.compile is significantly
slower than the other runs, although it is much faster than the first run. This is because the "reduce-overhead"
mode runs a few warm-up iterations for CUDA graphs.
Now, let’s consider comparing training.
model = init_model()
opt = torch.optim.Adam(model.parameters())
def train(mod, data):
opt.zero_grad(True)
pred = mod(data[0])
loss = torch.nn.CrossEntropyLoss()(pred, data[1])
loss.backward()
opt.step()
eager_times = []
for i in range(N_ITERS):
inp = generate_data(16)
_, eager_time = timed(lambda: train(model, inp))
eager_times.append(eager_time)
print(f"eager train time {i}: {eager_time}")
print("~" * 10)
model = init_model()
opt = torch.optim.Adam(model.parameters())
# Note that because we are compiling a regular Python function, we do not
# call any .compile() method.
train_opt = torch.compile(train, mode="reduce-overhead")
compile_times = []
for i in range(N_ITERS):
inp = generate_data(16)
_, compile_time = timed(lambda: train_opt(model, inp))
compile_times.append(compile_time)
print(f"compile train time {i}: {compile_time}")
print("~" * 10)
eager_med = np.median(eager_times)
compile_med = np.median(compile_times)
speedup = eager_med / compile_med
assert speedup > 1
print(
f"(train) eager median: {eager_med}, compile median: {compile_med}, speedup: {speedup}x"
)
print("~" * 10)
eager train time 0: 0.2919403381347656
eager train time 1: 0.05269606399536133
eager train time 2: 0.05054361724853516
eager train time 3: 0.05023539352416992
eager train time 4: 0.05095423889160156
eager train time 5: 0.049931262969970705
eager train time 6: 0.05007360076904297
eager train time 7: 0.05031628799438476
eager train time 8: 0.049928192138671876
eager train time 9: 0.05018828964233398
~~~~~~~~~~
compile train time 0: 150.708328125
compile train time 1: 2.93589306640625
compile train time 2: 0.0237587833404541
compile train time 3: 0.021552127838134767
compile train time 4: 0.02081177520751953
compile train time 5: 0.020839424133300782
compile train time 6: 0.020925439834594727
compile train time 7: 0.020928512573242186
compile train time 8: 0.020797439575195312
compile train time 9: 0.020921344757080077
~~~~~~~~~~
(train) eager median: 0.05027584075927734, compile median: 0.02092697620391846, speedup: 2.4024417225582484x
~~~~~~~~~~
Again, we can see that torch.compile takes longer in the first
iteration, as it must compile the model, but in subsequent iterations, we see
significant speedups compared to eager.
We remark that the speedup numbers presented in this tutorial are for demonstration purposes only. Official speedup values can be seen at the TorchInductor performance dashboard.
Conclusion#
In this tutorial, we applied torch.compile to training and inference on a real model,
demonstrating speedups.
Importantly, we note that the first few iterations of a compiled model are slower than eager mode due to compilation overhead, but subsequent iterations are expected to have speedups.
For a gentle introduction to torch.compile, please check out the introduction to torch.compile tutorial.
To troubleshoot issues and to gain a deeper understanding of how to apply torch.compile to your code, check out the torch.compile programming model.
We hope that you will give torch.compile a try!
Total running time of the script: (3 minutes 28.685 seconds)