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: 0.35501565551757813
/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: 49.98791796875

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: 0.01785753631591797
eager eval time 1: 0.016527360916137695
eager eval time 2: 0.01621299171447754
eager eval time 3: 0.016232448577880858
eager eval time 4: 0.016060415267944335
eager eval time 5: 0.016219135284423827
eager eval time 6: 0.016106496810913085
eager eval time 7: 0.016123903274536132
eager eval time 8: 0.016123903274536132
eager eval time 9: 0.016096256256103517
~~~~~~~~~~
compile eval time 0: 0.0605623664855957
compile eval time 1: 0.007825407981872558
compile eval time 2: 0.008392704010009766
compile eval time 3: 0.007476223945617676
compile eval time 4: 0.007498752117156982
compile eval time 5: 0.007481344223022461
compile eval time 6: 0.00753766393661499
compile eval time 7: 0.007522304058074952
compile eval time 8: 0.007542784214019775
compile eval time 9: 0.007526400089263916
~~~~~~~~~~
(eval) eager median: 0.016168447494506834, compile median: 0.007532032012939453, speedup: 2.146624903708678x
~~~~~~~~~~

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: 0.2875791320800781
eager train time 1: 0.05136588668823242
eager train time 2: 0.04910489654541016
eager train time 3: 0.0497786865234375
eager train time 4: 0.7891548461914063
eager train time 5: 0.05028147125244141
eager train time 6: 0.050375679016113284
eager train time 7: 0.05040332794189453
eager train time 8: 0.050141185760498044
eager train time 9: 0.04989440155029297
~~~~~~~~~~
compile train time 0: 151.01559375
compile train time 1: 2.932748291015625
compile train time 2: 0.022687744140625
compile train time 3: 0.021409791946411134
compile train time 4: 0.020744192123413087
compile train time 5: 0.02084556770324707
compile train time 6: 0.020710399627685547
compile train time 7: 0.020824064254760744
compile train time 8: 0.02071347236633301
compile train time 9: 0.020815872192382814
~~~~~~~~~~
(train) eager median: 0.05032857513427735, compile median: 0.020834815979003905, speedup: 2.4155996954806565x
~~~~~~~~~~

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 28.342 seconds)