Repository navigation
How compatible is this with DFlash/PFlash/etc? #2
Replies: 1 comment 2 replies
|
Sorry for the delayed reply, missed the notification on this! The main difference between dkv and quantization methods like TurboQuant/RotorQuant comes down to how attention is computed. Quantization shrinks individual KV vectors (paying a dequant/rotation compute cost), but decode still scans every token in the context. dkv uses structural compression—anchors + low-rank SVD deltas + exact residuals—and scores queries directly in the low-rank subspace without decompressing full keys. Paired with top-$K$ block routing, memory traffic stays bounded rather than scaling linearly with context. On long prompts, this also speeds up prefill: at 64k on Apple Silicon, dkv prefill clocks in at 477s vs 821s on dense (1.7x faster) while avoiding OOM. As for the 3x–10x speedups in LuceBox (DFlash) and Rapid-MLX: those multipliers come from speculative decoding and kernel/graph fusion, which turn memory-bandwidth-bound single-token steps into parallel multi-token verification. dkv is completely orthogonal to that—it shrinks the KV footprint and prefill cost, while speculative decoding multiplies tokens per forward pass. You can stack them directly using dkv's |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Thanks for creating a new KV cache mechanism! Last season it was TurboQuant/RotorQuant, and things are already heating up in the quantization space. But other than RAM savings, I so care about inference speeds, and whatever hacks can 3x/10x performance. This includes whatever LuceBox is cooking (which Rapid-MLX includes) https://github.com/raullenchai/Rapid-MLX https://github.com/Luce-Org/lucebox-hub
All reactions