Rate this Page
torch.compile End-to-End Tutorial">

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 >= 2.0

  • torchvision

What you will learn
  • How to apply torch.compile to a real model

  • torch.compile speedups on a real model

  • torch.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: 0.36972750854492187
/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: 49.92163671875

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: 0.016946176528930663
eager eval time 2: 0.016476160049438478
eager eval time 3: 0.01600921630859375
eager eval time 4: 0.01622220802307129
eager eval time 5: 0.015988608360290528
eager eval time 6: 0.01640140724182129
eager eval time 7: 0.01623040008544922
eager eval time 8: 0.016129024505615236
eager eval time 9: 0.015982655525207518
~~~~~~~~~~
compile eval time 0: 0.06209436798095703
compile eval time 1: 0.007877600193023682
compile eval time 2: 0.00838963222503662
compile eval time 3: 0.007469056129455566
compile eval time 4: 0.0074997758865356446
compile eval time 5: 0.007479296207427978
compile eval time 6: 0.007490560054779053
compile eval time 7: 0.007484416007995606
compile eval time 8: 0.0075345921516418455
compile eval time 9: 0.007502816200256348
~~~~~~~~~~
(eval) eager median: 0.016226304054260253, compile median: 0.007501296043395996, speedup: 2.1631334052660933x
~~~~~~~~~~

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: 0.2936769714355469
eager train time 1: 0.052242431640625
eager train time 2: 0.048866302490234374
eager train time 3: 0.04959641647338867
eager train time 4: 0.956390380859375
eager train time 5: 0.050991104125976565
eager train time 6: 0.05127065658569336
eager train time 7: 0.050423809051513675
eager train time 8: 0.05123072052001953
eager train time 9: 0.05063167953491211
~~~~~~~~~~
compile train time 0: 153.032953125
compile train time 1: 2.925470703125
compile train time 2: 0.024749055862426757
compile train time 3: 0.021551103591918946
compile train time 4: 0.02084556770324707
compile train time 5: 0.020732927322387695
compile train time 6: 0.020779008865356444
compile train time 7: 0.0208035831451416
compile train time 8: 0.020783103942871094
compile train time 9: 0.020797439575195312
~~~~~~~~~~
(train) eager median: 0.051110912322998046, compile median: 0.020824575424194337, speedup: 2.454355552604282x
~~~~~~~~~~

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 30.587 seconds)