Specializing to one fuel and one GPU is worth 1.2x to 1.5x at batch 1
Question. Is there published evidence that an engine written for an exact model and an exact GPU beats a general one? If the gain is small, rocket is not worth building.
Method: published sources only. Nothing measured locally.
Where the loss comes from
| cost | measured | source |
|---|---|---|
| bandwidth left unused | vLLM and SGLang reach at most 50% of H100 bandwidth on Llama-1B at batch 1. A megakernel reaches 78%. | Hazy Research, Fleet |
| kernel launches | TensorRT-LLM on Qwen2.5-1.5B issued 1,655,550 launches costing about 3.3 s, 14.6% of end-to-end time | Ada-MK |
| host scheduling | page allocation and request scheduling run on the CPU, adding CPU-GPU synchronization | MPK |
A forward pass split into about 100 kernels stalls weight loading at every boundary. A GB10 node has 20 Arm cores to do the host half of that.
The 50% figure has independent corroboration: SambaNova reports optimized GPU implementations on H100 rarely exceeding 50% HBM bandwidth (SN40L).
Measured gains
| system | hardware and fuel | result |
|---|---|---|
| Hazy Research | H100, Llama-1B | up to 2.5x over vLLM and 1.5x over SGLang. Forward pass under 1 ms, 0.68 ms on B200. |
| MPK | A100 and H100 | 1.0x to 1.7x over vLLM and SGLang, largest for small models and newer GPUs |
| Event Tensor | Qwen3-30B-A3B, sparse MoE | 1.48x over vLLM and 1.20x over SGLang at batch 1. 1.23x on MoE layers. |
| Ada-MK | L20, Qwen3-1.7B | 50.2% over vLLM and 23.6% over vanilla TensorRT-LLM at batch 1. Deployed in Baidu advertising. |
| FlashMLA | H800, DeepSeek MLA | written because general libraries target standard MHA. 3000 GB/s memory-bound. |
Counter-evidence
The gain is a low-batch phenomenon, and every source says so.
- Ada-MK leads from batch 1 to 8, then vLLM takes batch 16 by 3.5%. Scheduling and memory management win at concurrency.
- Event Tensor only matches vLLM under TP=4 and trails SGLang there, attributed to SGLang’s CPU scheduler.
- MPK’s gain is largest when compute per token is small.
Verdict
Accepted. Three cited conditions describe a spark: small compute per token, a weak host CPU, memory-bound decode. 18B active parameters against 273 GB/s is the case where specialization pays most.
The counter-evidence sets the target. An engine has to win at low batch and match at high batch. The measured ceiling for that win is about 1.5x.
Reopen if.
- a general engine lands persistent-kernel decode with CPU-free scheduling, which removes the launch and synchronization costs these results measure