Save money, do more work, and use less energy with 16th Generation Dell PowerEdge R760 servers
See the ReportTue, 10 Oct 2023 16:51:44 -0000
|Read Time: 0 minutes
Principled Technologies testing showed that a 16th Generation Dell PowerEdge R760 server featuring a Broadcom BCM57508-P2100G NIC delivered all three benefits vs. previous-generation PowerEdge servers
With economic uncertainty, volatile energy prices, and sustainability goals, many organizations are looking for ways to reduce their energy costs and consumption. At the same time, data proliferation and new technologies such as machine learning and artificial intelligence require a large amount of processing power, leading to data centers running at higher power densities—creating more demand on cooling systems.
Principled Technologies (PT) compared the cost, performance, and power efficiency of three generations of Dell PowerEdge servers to show how organizations can potentially save money and accomplish more work by upgrading their older servers.
Using the memtier_benchmark to run 100 percent read workloads against a Redis database, PT measured the operations per second (Ops/s) and throughput (MB/s) of a 14th Generation Dell PowerEdge R740, a 15th Generation Dell PowerEdge R750, and a 16th Generation Dell PowerEdge R760 server. PT calculated the power efficiency (Ops/s/watt) of the devices using the results of their testing, as well as the performance per dollar of each solution (Ops/s/USD).
The PowerEdge R760 server processed 129.5 percent more Ops/s with 24.2 percent better power efficiency than the previous-generation servers, doing over twice as much work with nearly 25 percent better power efficiency than the R740. It also did significantly more work per dollar than the older servers, handling as much as 166.1 percent more Ops/s per dollar. Based on the results of these tests, organizations can improve power efficiency and performance while cutting costs by upgrading to the latest-generation Dell PowerEdge R760 server with Broadcom NICs.
Server | Performance (Ops/s) | Throughput (MB/s) | Power (W) | Perf/W | Perf/USD |
PowerEdge R760 | 64,282,525.28 | 2,533.67 | 832.0 | 77,265.46 | 2,019.9 |
PowerEdge R750 | 49,215,573 | 1,936.3 | 696.1 | 70,698.44 | 1,610.3 |
PowerEdge R740 | 28,000,329.07 | 1,116.47 | 450.3 | 62,179.70 | 758.9 |
Related Blog Posts
Dell PowerEdge Servers Unleash Another Round of Excellent Results with MLPerf™ v4.0 Inference
Wed, 27 Mar 2024 15:12:53 -0000
|Read Time: 0 minutes
Today marks the unveiling of MLPerf v4.0 Inference results, which have emerged as an industry benchmark for AI systems. These benchmarks are responsible for assessing the system-level performance consisting of state-of-the-art hardware and software stacks. The benchmarking suite contains image classification, object detection, natural language processing, speech recognition, recommenders, medical image segmentation, LLM 6B and LLM 70B question answering, and text to image benchmarks that aim to replicate different deployment scenarios such as the data center and edge.
Dell Technologies is a founding member of MLCommons™ and has been actively making submissions since the inception of the Inference and Training benchmarks. See our MLPerf™ Inference v2.1 with NVIDIA GPU-Based Benchmarks on Dell PowerEdge Servers white paper that introduces the MLCommons Inference benchmark.
Our performance results are outstanding, serving as a clear indicator of our resolve to deliver outstanding system performance. These improvements enable higher system performance when it is most needed, for example, for demanding generative AI (GenAI) workloads.
What is new with Inference 4.0?
Inference 4.0 and Dell’s submission include the following:
- Newly introduced Llama 2 question answering and text to image stable diffusion benchmarks, and submission across different Dell PowerEdge XE platforms.
- Improved GPT-J (225 percent improvement) and DLRM-DCNv2 (100 percent improvement) performance. Improved throughput performance of the GPTJ and DLRM-DCNv2 workload means faster natural language processing tasks like summarization and faster relevant recommendations that allow a boost to revenue respectively.
- First-time submission of server results with the recently released PowerEdge R7615 and PowerEdge XR8620t servers with NVIDIA accelerators.
- Besides accelerator-based results, Intel-based CPU-only results.
- Results for PowerEdge servers with Qualcomm accelerators.
- Power results showing high performance/watt scores for the submissions.
- Virtualized results on Dell servers with Broadcom.
Overview of results
Dell Technologies delivered 187 data center, 28 data center power, 42 edge, and 24 edge power results. Some of the more impressive results were generated by our:
- Dell PowerEdge XE9680, XE9640, XE8640, and servers with NVIDIA H100 Tensor Core GPUs
- Dell PowerEdge R7515, R750xa, and R760xa servers with NVIDIA L40S and A100 Tensor Core GPUs
- Dell PowerEdge XR7620 and XR8620t servers with NVIDIA L4 Tensor Core GPUs
- Dell PowerEdge R760 server with Intel Emerald Rapids CPUs
- Dell PowerEdge R760 with Qualcomm QAIC100 Ultra accelerators
NVIDIA-based results include the following GPUs:
- Eight-way NVIDIA H100 GPU (SXM)
- Four-way NVIDIA H100 GPU (SXM)
- Four-way NVIDIA A100 GPU (PCIe)
- Four-way NVIDIA L40S GPU (PCIe)
- NVIDIA L4 GPU
These accelerators were benchmarked on different servers such as PowerEdge XE9680, XE8640, XE9640, R760xa, XR7620, and XR8620t servers across data center and edge suites.
Dell contributed to about 1/4th of the closed data center and edge submissions. The large number of result choices offers end users an opportunity to make data-driven purchase decisions and set performance and data center design expectations.
Interesting Dell data points
The most interesting data points include:
- Performance results across different benchmarks are excellent and show that Dell servers meet the increasing need to serve different workload types.
- Among 20 submitters, Dell Technologies was one of the few companies that covered all benchmarks in the closed division for data center suites.
- The PowerEdge XE8640 and PowerEdge XE9640 servers compared to other four-way systems procured winning titles across all the benchmarks including the newly launched stable diffusion and Llama 2 benchmark.
- The PowerEdge XE9680 server compared to other eight-way systems procured several winning titles for benchmarks such as ResNet Server, 3D-Unet, BERT-99, and BERT-99.9 Server.
- The PowerEdge XE9680 server delivers the highest performance/watt compared to other submitters with 8-way NVIDIA H100 GPUs for ResNet Server, GPTJ Server, and Llama 2 Offline
- The Dell XR8620t server for edge benchmarks with NVIDIA L4 GPUs outperformed other submissions.
- The PowerEdge R750xa server with NVIDIA A100 PCIe GPUs outperformed other submissions on the ResNet, RetinaNet, 3D-Unet, RNN-T, BERT 99.9, and BERT 99 benchmarks.
- The PowerEdge R760xa server with NVIDIA L40S GPUs outperformed other submissions on the ResNet Server, RetinaNet Server, RetinaNet Offline, 3D-UNet 99, RNN-T, BERT-99, BERT-99.9, DLRM-v2-99, DLRM-v2-99.9, GPTJ-99, GPTJ-99.9, Stable Diffusion XL Server, and Stable Diffusion XL Offline benchmarks.
Highlights
The following figure shows the different Offline and Server performance scenarios in the data center suite. These results provide an overview; follow-up blogs will provide more details about the results.
The following figure shows that these servers delivered excellent performance for all models in the benchmark such as ResNet, RetinaNet, 3D-UNet, RNN-T, BERT, DLRM-v2, GPT-J, Stable Diffusion XL, and Llama 2. Note that different benchmarks operate on varied scales. They have all been showcased in an exponentially scaled y-axis in the following figure:
Figure 1: System throughput for submitted systems for the data center suite.
The following figure shows single-stream and multistream scenario results for the edge for ResNet, RetinaNet, 3D-Unet, RNN-T, BERT 99, GPTJ, and Stable Diffusion XL benchmarks. The lower the latency, the better the results and for Offline scenario, higher the better.
Figure 2: Edge results with PowerEdge XR7620 and XR8620t servers overview
Conclusion
The preceding results were officially submitted to MLCommons. They are MLPerf-compliant results for the Inference v4.0 benchmark across various benchmarks and suites for all the tasks in the benchmark such as image classification, object detection, natural language processing, speech recognition, recommenders, medical image segmentation, LLM 6B and LLM 70B question answering, and text to image. These results prove that Dell PowerEdge XE9680, XE8640, XE9640, and R760xa servers are capable of delivering high performance for inference workloads. Dell Technologies secured several #1 titles that make Dell PowerEdge servers an excellent choice for data center and edge inference deployments. End users can benefit from the plethora of submissions that help make server performance and sizing decisions, which ultimately deliver enterprises’ AI transformation and shows Dell’s commitment to deliver higher performance.
MLCommons Results
https://mlcommons.org/en/inference-datacenter-40/
https://mlcommons.org/en/inference-edge-40/
The preceding graphs are MLCommons results for MLPerf IDs from 4.0-0025 to 4.0-0035 on the closed datacenter, 4.0-0036 to 4.0-0038 on the closed edge, 4.0-0033 in the closed datacenter power, and 4.0-0037 in closed edge power.
Model Training – Dell Validated Design
Fri, 03 May 2024 16:09:06 -0000
|Read Time: 0 minutes
Introduction
When it comes to large language models (LLMs), there may be fundamental question that everyone looking to leverage foundational models need to answer: should I train my model, or should I customize an existing model?
There can be strong arguments for either. In a previous post, Nomuka Luehr covered some popular customization approaches. In this blog, I will look at the other side of the question: training, and answer the following questions: Why would I train an LLM? What factors should I consider? I’ll also cover the recently announced Generative AI in the Enterprise – Model Training Dell Validated Design - A Scalable and Modular Production Infrastructure for AI Large Language Model Training. This is a collaborative effort between Dell Technologies and NVIDIA, aimed at facilitating high-performance, scalable, and modular solutions for training large language models (LLMs) in enterprise settings (more about that later).
Training pipeline
The data pipelines for training and customization are similar because both processes involve feeding specific datasets through the LLM.
In the case of training, the dataset is typically much larger than for customization, because customization is targeted at a specific domain. Remember, for training a model, the goal is to embed as much knowledge into the model as possible, so the dataset must be large.
This raises the question of the dataset and its accuracy and relevance. Curating and preparing the data are essential processes to avoid biases and misinformation. This step is vital for ensuring the quality and relevance of the data fed into the LLM. It involves meticulously selecting and refining data to minimize biases and misinformation, which if overlooked, could compromise the model's output accuracy and reliability. Data curation is not just about gathering information; it's about ensuring that the model's knowledge base is comprehensive, balanced, and reflects a wide array of perspectives.
When the dataset is curated and prepped, the actual process of training involves a series of steps where the data is fed through the LLM. The model generates outputs based on the input provided, which are then compared against expected results. Discrepancies between the actual and expected outputs lead to adjustments in the model's weights, gradually improving its accuracy through iterative refinement (using supervised learning, unsupervised learning, and so on).
While the overarching principle of this process might seem straightforward, it's anything but simple. Each step involves complex decisions, from selecting the right data and preprocessing it effectively to customizing the model's parameters for optimal performance. Moreover, the training landscape is evolving, with advancements, such as supervised and unsupervised learning, which offer different pathways to model development. Supervised learning, with its reliance on labeled datasets, remains a cornerstone for most LLM training regimes, by providing a structured way to embed knowledge. However, unsupervised learning, which explores data patterns without predefined labels, is gaining traction for its ability to unearth novel insights.
These intricacies highlight the importance of leveraging advanced tools and technologies. Companies like NVIDIA are at the forefront, offering sophisticated software stacks that automate many aspects of the process, and reducing the barriers to entry for those looking to develop or refine LLMs.
Network and storage performance
In the previous section, I touched on the dataset required to train or customize models. While having the right dataset is a critical piece of this process, being able to deliver that dataset fast enough to the GPUs running the model is another critical and yet often overlooked piece. To achieve that, you must consider two components:
- Storage performance
- Network performance
For anyone looking to train a model, having a node-to-node (also known as East-West) network infrastructure based on 100Gbps, or better yet, 400Gbps, is critical, because it ensures sufficient bandwidth and throughput to keep saturated the type of GPUs, such as the NVIDIA H100, required for training.
Because customization datasets are typically smaller than full training datasets, a 100Gbps network can be sufficient, but as with everything in technology, your mileage may vary and proper testing is critical to ensure adequate performance for your needs.
Datasets used to train models are typically very large: in the 100s of GB. For instance, the dataset used to train GPT-4 is said to be over 550GB. With the advance of RDMA over Converged Ethernet (RoCE), GPUs can pull the data directly from storage. And because 100Gbps networks are able to support that load, the bottleneck has moved to the storage.
Because of the nature of large language models, the dataset used to train them is made of unstructured data, such as Sharepoint sites and document repositories, and are therefore most often hosted on network attached storage, such as Dell PowerScale. I am not going to get into further details on the storage part because I’ll be publishing another blog on how to use PowerScale to support model training. But you must make careful considerations when designing the storage to ensure that the storage is able to keep up with the GPUs and the network.
A note about checkpointing
As we previously mentioned, the process of training is iterative. Based on the input provided, the model generates outputs, which are then compared against expected results. Discrepancies between the actual and expected outputs lead to adjustments in the model's weights, gradually improving its accuracy through iterative refinement. This process is repeated across many iterations over the entire training dataset.
A training run (that is, running an entire dataset through a model and updating its weight), is extremely time consuming and resource intensive. According to this blog post, a single training run of ChatGPT-4 costs about $4.6M. Imagine running a few of them in a row, only to have an issue and having to start again. Because of the cost associated with training runs, it is often a good idea to save the weights of the model at an intermediate stage during the run. Should something fail later on, you can load the saved weights and restart from that point. Snapshotting the weights of a model in this way is called checkpointing. The challenge with checkpointing is performance.
A checkpoint is typically stored on an external storage system, so again, storage performance and network performance are critical considerations to offer the proper bandwidth and throughput for checkpointing. For instance, the Llama-2 70B consumes about 129GB of storage. Because each of its checkpoints is the exact same predictable size, they can be saved quickly (to disk) to ensure the proper performance of the training process.
NVIDIA software stack
The choice of which framework to use depends on whether you typically lean more towards doing it yourself or buying specific outcomes. The benefit of doing it yourself is ultimate flexibility, sometimes at the expense of time to market, whereas buying an outcome can offer better time to market at the expense of having to choose within a pre-determined set of components. In my case, I have always tended to favor buying outcomes, which is why I want to cover the NVIDIA AI Enterprise (NVAIE) software stack at a high level.
The following figure is a simple layered cake that showcases the various components of the NVAIE, in light green.
The white paper Generative AI in the Enterprise – Model Training Dell Validated Design provides an in-depth exploration of a reference design developed by Dell Technologies in collaboration with NVIDIA. It offers enterprises a robust and scalable framework to train large language models effectively. Whether you're a CTO, AI engineer, or IT executive, this guide addresses the crucial aspects of model training infrastructure, including hardware specifications, software design, and practical validation findings.
Training the Dell Validated Design architecture
The validated architecture aims to give the reader a broad output of model training results. We used two separate configuration types across the compute, network and GPU stack.
There are two 8x PowerEdge XE9680 configurations both with 8x NVIDIA H100 SXM GPUs. The difference between the configurations (again) is the network. The first configuration is equipped with 8x ConnectX-7; the second configuration is equipped with four ConnectX-7 adapters. Both are configured for NDR.
On the storage side, the evolution of PowerScale continues to thrive in the AI domain with the launch of its latest line, including the notable PowerScale F710. This addition embraces Dell PowerEdge 16G servers, heralding a new era in performance capabilities for PowerScale's all-flash nodes. On the software side, the F710 benefits from the enhanced performance features found in the PowerScale OneFS 9.7 update.
Key takeaways
The guide provides training times for the Llama 2 7B and Llama 2 70B models over 500 steps, with variations based on the number of nodes and configurations used.
Why only 500 steps? The decision to train models for a set number of steps (500), rather than to train models for convergence, is practical for validation purposes. It allows for a consistent benchmarking metric across different scenarios and models, to produce a clearer comparison of infrastructure efficiency and model performance in the early stages.
Efficiency of Model Sizing: The choice of 7B and 70B Llama 2 model architectures indicates a strategic approach to balance computational efficiency with potential model performance. Smaller models like the 7B are quicker to train and require fewer resources, making them suitable for preliminary tests and smaller-scale applications. On the other hand, the 70B model, while significantly more resource-intensive, was chosen for its potential to capture more complex patterns and provide more accurate outputs.
Configuration and Resource Optimization: Comparing two hardware configurations provides valuable insights into optimizing resource allocation. While higher-end configurations (Configuration 1 with 8 adapters) offer slightly better performance, you must weigh the marginal gains against the increased costs. This highlights the importance of tailoring the hardware setup to the specific needs and scale of the project, where sometimes, a less maximalist approach (Configuration 2 with 4 adapters) can provide a more balanced cost-to-benefit ratio, especially in smaller setups. Certainly something to think about!
Parallelism Settings: The specific settings for tensor and pipeline parallelism (as covered in the guide), along with batch sizes and sequence lengths, are crucial for training efficiency. These settings impact the training speed and model performance, indicating the need for careful tuning to balance resource use with training effectiveness. The choice of these parameters reflects a strategic approach to managing computational loads and training times.
To close
With the scalable and modular infrastructure designed by Dell Technologies and NVIDIA, you are well-equipped to embark on or enhance your AI initiatives. Leverage this blueprint to drive innovation, refine your operational capabilities, and maintain a competitive edge in harnessing the power of large language models.
Authors: Bertrand Sirodot and Damian Erangey