[HN Gopher] Big GPUs don't need big PCs
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Big GPUs don't need big PCs
        
       Author : mikece
       Score  : 101 points
       Date   : 2025-12-20 17:49 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.jeffgeerling.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.jeffgeerling.com)
        
       | jonahbenton wrote:
       | So glad someone did this. Have been running big gpus on egpus
       | connected to spare laptops and thinking why not pis.
        
       | 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
       | Datapoints like this really make me reconsider my daily driver. I
       | should be running one of those $300 mini PCs at <20W. With ~flat
       | CPU performance gains, would be fine for the next 10 years. Just
       | remote into my beefy workstation when I actually need to do real
       | work. Browsing the web, watching videos, even playing some games
       | is easily within their wheelhouse.
        
         | ekropotin wrote:
         | As experiment, I decided to try using proxmox VM with eGPU and
         | usb bus bypassed to it, as my main PC for browsing and working
         | on hobby projects.
         | 
         | It's just 1 vCPU with 4 Gb ram, and you know what? It's more
         | than enough for these needs. I think hardware manufactures
         | falsely convinced us that every professional needs beefy laptop
         | to be productive.
        
         | reactordev wrote:
         | I went with a beelink for this purpose. Works great.
         | 
         | Keeps the desk nice and tidy while "the beasts" roar in a
         | soundproofed closet.
        
         | samuelknight wrote:
         | Switching from my 8-core ryzen minipc to an 8-core ryzen
         | desktop makes my unit tests run way faster. TDP limits can tip
         | you off to very different performance envelopes in otherwise
         | similar spec CPUs.
        
       | yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
       | I've been kicking this around in my head for a while. If I want
       | to run LLMs locally, a decent GPU is really the only important
       | thing. At that point, the question becomes, roughly, what is the
       | cheapest computer to tack on the side of the GPU? Of course, that
       | assumes that everything does in fact work; unlike OP I am barely
       | in a position to _understand_ eg. BAR problems, let alone try to
       | fix them, so what I actually did was build a cheap-ish x86 box
       | with a half-decent GPU and called it a day:) But it still is
       | stuck in my brain: there must be a more efficient way to do this,
       | especially if all you need is just enough computer to shuffle
       | data to and from the GPU and serve that over a network
       | connection.
        
         | zeusk wrote:
         | Get the DGX Spark computers? They're exactly what you're trying
         | to build.
        
         | tcdent wrote:
         | We're not yet to the point where a single PCIe device will get
         | you anything meaningful; IMO 128 GB of ram available to the GPU
         | is essential.
         | 
         | So while you don't need a ton of compute on the CPU you do need
         | the ability address multiple PCIe lanes. A relatively low-spec
         | AMD EPYC processor is fine if the motherboard exposes enough
         | lanes.
        
           | skhameneh wrote:
           | There is plenty that can run within 32/64/96gb VRAM. IMO
           | models like Phi-4 are underrated for many simple tasks. Some
           | quantized Gemma 3 are quite good as well.
           | 
           | There are larger/better models as well, but those tend to
           | really push the limits of 96gb.
           | 
           | FWIW when you start pushing into 128gb+, the ~500gb models
           | really start to become attractive because at that point
           | you're probably wanting just a bit more out of everything.
        
             | tcdent wrote:
             | IDK all of my personal and professional projects involve
             | pushing the SOTA to the absolute limit. Using anything
             | other than the latest OpenAI or Anthropic model is out of
             | the question.
             | 
             | Smaller open source models are a bit like 3d printing in
             | the early days; fun to experiment with but really not that
             | valuable for anything other than making toys.
             | 
             | Text summarization, maybe? But even then I want a model
             | that understands the complete context and does a good job.
             | Even things like "generate one sentence about the action
             | we're performing" I usually find I can just incorporate it
             | into the output schema of a larger request instead of
             | making a separate request to a smaller model.
        
               | xyzzy123 wrote:
               | It seems to me like the use case for local GPUs is almost
               | entirely privacy.
               | 
               | If you buy a 15k AUD rtx 6000 96GB, that card will
               | _never_ pay for itself on a gpt-oss:120b workload vs just
               | using openrouter - no matter how many tokens you push
               | through it - because the cost of residential power in
               | Australia means you cannot generate tokens cheaper than
               | the cloud even if the card were free.
        
               | joefourier wrote:
               | There's a few more considerations:
               | 
               | - You can use the GPU for training and run your own fine
               | tuned models
               | 
               | - You can have much higher generation speeds
               | 
               | - You can sell the GPU on the used market in ~2 years
               | time for a significant portion of its value
               | 
               | - You can run other types of models like image, audio or
               | video generation that are not available via an API, or
               | cost significantly more
               | 
               | - Psychologically, you don't feel like you have to
               | constrain your token spending and you can, for instance,
               | just leave an agent to run for hours or overnight without
               | feeling bad that you just "wasted" $20
               | 
               | - You won't be running the GPU at max power constantly
        
               | 15155 wrote:
               | Or censorship avoidance
        
               | girvo wrote:
               | > because the cost of residential power in Australia
               | 
               | This _so_ doesn 't really matter to your overall point
               | which I agree with but:
               | 
               | The rise of rooftop solar and home battery energy storage
               | flips this a bit now in Australia, IMO. At least where I
               | live, every house has a solar panel on it.
               | 
               | Not worth it _just_ for local LLM usage, but an
               | interesting change to energy economics IMO!
        
               | popalchemist wrote:
               | This is simply not true. Your heuristic is broken.
               | 
               | The recent Gemma 3 models, which are produced by Google
               | (a little startup - heard of em?) outperform the last
               | several OpenAI releases.
               | 
               | Closed does not necessarily mean better. Plus the local
               | ones can be finetuned to whatever use case you may have,
               | won't have any inputs blocked by censorship
               | functionality, and you can optimize them by distilling to
               | whatever spec you need.
               | 
               | Anyway all that is extraneous detail - the important
               | thing is to decouple "open" and "small" from "worse" in
               | your mind. The most recent Gemma 3 model specifically is
               | incredible, and it makes sense, given that Google has
               | access to many times more data than OpenAI for training
               | (something like a factor of 10 at least). Which is of
               | course a very straightforward idea to wrap your head
               | around, Google was scrapign the internet for decades
               | before OpenAI even entered the scene.
               | 
               | So just because their Gemma model is released in an open-
               | source (open weights) way, doesn't mean it should be
               | discounted. There's no magic voodoo happening behind the
               | scenes at OpenAI or Anthropic; the models are essentially
               | of the same type. But Google releases theirs to undercut
               | the profitability of their competitors.
        
               | tcdent wrote:
               | This one?
               | https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gemma-3-27b
        
         | dist-epoch wrote:
         | This problem was already solved 10 years ago - crypto mining
         | motherboards, which have a large number of PCIe slots, a CPU
         | socket, one memory slot, and not much else.
         | 
         | > Asus made a crypto-mining motherboard that supports up to 20
         | GPUs
         | 
         | https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/30/17408610/asus-crypto-mini...
         | 
         | For LLMs you'll probably want a different setup, with some
         | memory too, some m.2 storage.
        
           | jsheard wrote:
           | Those only gave each GPU a single PCIe lane though, since
           | crypto mining barely needed to move any data around. If your
           | application doesn't fit that mould then you'll need a much,
           | much more expensive platform.
        
             | dist-epoch wrote:
             | After you load the weights into the GPU and keep the KV
             | cache there too, you don't need any other significant
             | traffic.
        
               | numpad0 wrote:
               | Even in tensor parallel modes? I thought it could only
               | work if you're fine stalling all but n GPU for n users at
               | any given moments.
        
           | skhameneh wrote:
           | In theory, it's only sufficient for pipeline parallel due to
           | limited lanes and interconnect bandwidth.
           | 
           | Generally, scalability on consumer GPUs falls off between 4-8
           | GPUs for most. Those running more GPUs are typically using a
           | higher quantity of smaller GPUs for cost effectiveness.
        
           | zozbot234 wrote:
           | M.2 is mostly just a different form factor for PCIe anyway.
        
         | seanmcdirmid wrote:
         | And you don't want to go the M4 Max/M3 Ultra route? It works
         | well enough for most mid sized LLMs.
        
         | binsquare wrote:
         | I run a crowd sourced website to collect data on the best and
         | cheapest hardware setup for local LLM here:
         | https://inferbench.com/
         | 
         | Source code: https://github.com/BinSquare/inferbench
        
           | nodja wrote:
           | Cool site, I noticed the 3090 is on there twice.
           | 
           | https://inferbench.com/gpu/NVIDIA%20GeForce%20RTX%203090
           | 
           | https://inferbench.com/gpu/NVIDIA%20RTX%203090
        
             | binsquare wrote:
             | Oh nice catch, I'll fix that
        
         | Eisenstein wrote:
         | There is a whole section in here on how to spec out a cheap rig
         | and what to look for:
         | 
         | * https://jabberjabberjabber.github.io/Local-AI-Guide/
        
       | Wowfunhappy wrote:
       | I really would have liked to see gaming performance, although I
       | realize it might be difficult to find a AAA game that supports
       | ARM. (Forcing the Pi to emulate x86 with FEX doesn't seem
       | entirely fair.)
        
         | 3eb7988a1663 wrote:
         | You might have to thread the needle to find a game which does
         | not bottleneck on the CPU.
        
       | kristjansson wrote:
       | Really why have the PCI/CPU artifice at all? Apple and Nvidia
       | have the right idea: put the MPP on the same die/package as the
       | CPU.
        
         | bigyabai wrote:
         | > put the MPP on the same die/package as the CPU.
         | 
         | That would help in latency-constrained workloads, but I don't
         | think it would make much of a difference for AI or most HPC
         | applications.
        
       | lostmsu wrote:
       | Now compare batched training performance. Or batched inference.
       | 
       | Of course prefill is going to be GPU bound. You only send a few
       | thousand bytes to it, and don't really ask to return much. But
       | after prefill is done, unless you use batched mode, you aren't
       | really using your GPU for anything more that it's VRAM bandwidth.
        
       | numpad0 wrote:
       | Not sure what was unexpected about the multi GPU part.
       | 
       | It's very well known that most LLM frameworks including llama.cpp
       | splits models by layers, which has sequential dependency, and so
       | multi GPU setups are completely stalled unless there are n_gpu
       | users/tasks running in parallel. It's also known that some GPUs
       | are faster in "prompt processing" and some in "token generation"
       | that combining Radeon and NVIDIA does something sometimes.
       | Reportedly the inter-layer transfer sizes are in kilobyte ranges
       | and PCIe x1 is plenty or something.
       | 
       | It takes appropriate backends with "tensor parallel" mode
       | support, which splits the neural network parallel to the
       | direction of flow of data, which also obviously benefit
       | substantially from good node interconnect between GPUs like PCIe
       | x16 or NVlink/Infinity Fabric bridge cables, and/or inter-GPU DMA
       | over PCIe(called GPU P2P or GPUdirect or some lingo like that).
       | 
       | Absent those, I've read somewhere that people can sometimes see
       | GPU utilization spikes walking over GPUs on nvtop-style tools.
       | 
       | Looking for a way to break up tasks for LLMs so that there will
       | be multiple tasks to run concurrently would be interesting, maybe
       | like creating one "manager" and few "delegated engineers"
       | personalities. Or simulating multiple different domains of brain
       | such as speech center, visual cortex, language center, etc.
       | communicating in tokens might be interesting in working around
       | this problem.
        
         | zozbot234 wrote:
         | > Looking for a way to break up tasks for LLMs so that there
         | will be multiple tasks to run concurrently would be
         | interesting, maybe like creating one "manager" and few
         | "delegated engineers" personalities.
         | 
         | This is pretty much what "agents" are for. The manager model
         | constructs prompts and contexts that the delegated models can
         | work on in parallel, returning results when they're done.
        
         | nodja wrote:
         | > Reportedly the inter-layer transfer sizes are in kilobyte
         | ranges and PCIe x1 is plenty or something.
         | 
         | Not an expert, but napkin math tells me that more often that
         | not this will be in the order of megabytes--not kilobytes--
         | since it scales with sequence length.
         | 
         | Example: Qwen3 30B has a hidden state size of 5120, even if
         | quantized to 8 bits that's 5120 bytes per token. It would pass
         | the MB boundary with just a little over 200 tokens. Still not
         | much of an issue when a single PCIe lane is ~2GB/s.
         | 
         | I think device to device latency is more of an issue here, but
         | I don't know enough to assert that with confidence.
        
       | kgeist wrote:
       | What about constrained decoding (with JSON schemas)? I noticed my
       | vLLM instance is using 1 CPU 100%.
        
       | jauntywundrkind wrote:
       | PCIe 3.0 is the nice easy convenient generation where 1 lane =
       | 1GBps. Given the overhead, thats pretty close to 10Gb ethernet
       | speeds (low latency though).
       | 
       | I do wonder how long the cards are going to need host systems at
       | all. We've already seen GPUs with m.2 ssd attached! Radeon Pro
       | SSG hails back from 2016! You still need a way to get the model
       | on that in the first place to get work in and out, but a 1Gbe and
       | small RISC-V chip (which Nvidia already uses formanagement cores)
       | could suffice. Maybe even an rpi on the card.
       | https://www.techpowerup.com/224434/amd-announces-the-radeon-...
       | 
       | Given the gobs of memory cards have, they probably don't even
       | need storage; they just need big pipes. Intel had 100Gbe on their
       | Xeon & Xeon Phi cores (10x what we saw here!) in _2016_! GPUs
       | that just plug into the switch and talk across 400Gbe or
       | UltraEthernet or switched CXL, that run semi independently, feel
       | so sensible, so not outlandish.
       | https://www.servethehome.com/next-generation-interconnect-in...
       | 
       | It's far off for now, but flash makers are also looking at
       | radically many channel flash, which can provide absurdly high
       | GB/s, High Bandwidth Flash. And potentially integrated some
       | extremely parallel tensorcores on each channel. Switching from
       | DRAM to flash for AI processing could be a colossal win for
       | fitting large models cost effectively (& perhaps power
       | efficiently) while still having ridiculous gobs of bandwidth.
       | With that possible win of doing processing & filtering extremely
       | near to the data too. https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-
       | industry/sandisk-and-sk-hy...
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-20 23:00 UTC)