inference/research
verifiedhigh · 0.95updated 2026-10-04

AMD 8xMI355X, MLPerf Inference v6.1 Server: Llama 2 70B aggregate output throughput under the Server latency constraint

103274.69 output tokens/s (aggregate, harness 'Completed tokens per second')

Fields

id
benchmarks/bench-mlperf-v6-1-amd-mi355x-llama2-70b-server
Metric
tps_aggregate
Value
103,274.69
Unit
output tokens/s (aggregate, harness 'Completed tokens per second')
Model
Llama 2 70B (MLPerf v6.1 submission, FP4 weights)
Methodology
AGGREGATE. MLPerf Inference v6.1 Closed division, Datacenter suite, SERVER scenario. HARDWARE (MLPerf system id 8xMI355X_2xEPYC_9575F): 8xAMD Instinct MI355X 288GB HBM3e on 2x EPYC 9575F, 1 node. LOADS: target_qps 0.5 Poisson arrivals, min_duration 120000 ms, min_query_count 100, compiled-in per-query TTFT/TPOT 99th-percentile bounds with 'Performance constraints satisfied : Yes'. Batch size not a fixed published number. Completed samples per second 364.12. Model shape TOKENS_PER_SAMPLE 267.0. POWER: has_power=False, design_power_watts=null, no declared cap. OMITTED BY SOURCE: TP size, KV dtype, concurrency, clock state, cooling.
Measured by
vendor
Reproducible
yes
notes
AMD's Server-vs-Offline discount on its own node is 3.0% (106517 -> 103274.69), larger than NVIDIA's 2.2% on the B300 node. Same scenario, same model, same quantization class - so the size of this discount is a property of the implementation's scheduling headroom, not of the scenario. That is the general point: the scenario discount is an implementation characteristic and cannot be assumed constant across hardware. INTERCONNECT IDS FILLED 2026-10-04: interconnect_ids was empty; it now carries the interconnect list of the accelerator record(s) this run names (amd-instinct-mi355x). BASIS AND ITS LIMITS, stated because this field is easy to over-read: it records the FABRIC PRESENT IN THE HARDWARE CONFIGURATION, which is how every previously-filled record in this repo reads it, not traffic measured over that fabric. The clearest evidence for that convention is that single-GPU records already carry a scale-up fabric here - trtllm-llama31-8b-fp8-h100-1k1k-tps is 1x H100 at TP=1 and carries ['nvlink-4','nvswitch-4'] - and that host-link-only records carry a PCIe value (arc-pro-b70-mlperf-v6-1-llama2-70b-offline-tokens carries ['pcie-gen5'] on 4x Arc Pro B70, which has no GPU-to-GPU fabric at all). So a value here does NOT mean the interconnect was exercised by this particular workload, and must not be cited as evidence that it was. Whether the run actually crossed that fabric is a question about TP/EP/PP size, which this repo records in methodology, not here. NOT INVENTED: nothing was filled where the accelerator record itself carries no interconnect, so this field stays empty for any part whose own record has none - which is the honest state for a single-socket Apple sOC and for parts whose vendor publishes no host interface.

Notes

AMD's Server-vs-Offline discount on its own node is 3.0% (106517 -> 103274.69), larger than NVIDIA's 2.2% on the B300 node. Same scenario, same model, same quantization class - so the size of this discount is a property of the implementation's scheduling headroom, not of the scenario. That is the general point: the scenario discount is an implementation characteristic and cannot be assumed constant across hardware. INTERCONNECT IDS FILLED 2026-10-04: interconnect_ids was empty; it now carries the interconnect list of the accelerator record(s) this run names (amd-instinct-mi355x). BASIS AND ITS LIMITS, stated because this field is easy to over-read: it records the FABRIC PRESENT IN THE HARDWARE CONFIGURATION, which is how every previously-filled record in this repo reads it, not traffic measured over that fabric. The clearest evidence for that convention is that single-GPU records already carry a scale-up fabric here - trtllm-llama31-8b-fp8-h100-1k1k-tps is 1x H100 at TP=1 and carries ['nvlink-4','nvswitch-4'] - and that host-link-only records carry a PCIe value (arc-pro-b70-mlperf-v6-1-llama2-70b-offline-tokens carries ['pcie-gen5'] on 4x Arc Pro B70, which has no GPU-to-GPU fabric at all). So a value here does NOT mean the interconnect was exercised by this particular workload, and must not be cited as evidence that it was. Whether the run actually crossed that fabric is a question about TP/EP/PP size, which this repo records in methodology, not here. NOT INVENTED: nothing was filled where the accelerator record itself carries no interconnect, so this field stays empty for any part whose own record has none - which is the honest state for a single-socket Apple sOC and for parts whose vendor publishes no host interface.

Cross-references