Why is no one talking about --sub-quad-q-chunk-size --sub-quad-kv-chunk-size and --sub-quad-chunk-threshold optimisations #8370
Replies: 4 comments 1 reply
-
In general, little is said about optimizations or parameters to optimize yields in a scattered and unorganized manner. I don't know if it's because everybody has it very clear or because of the opposite :S |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
majority of users are running with nvidia hardware and in that case, and params you've mention apply when using |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
i agree, im an amd user, i dont have idea what's the best option here. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I have a rx6600 too, and tried a bunch of different combinations those params from many different posts and still I always get 1it/s on Windows. can you share your lines in webui-user.bat please? also what does it say inside System Info tab? mine are just Thanks |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I'm running on windows with a radeon RX 6600 and tried adding --sub-quad-q-chunk-size 512 --sub-quad-kv-chunk-size 512 --sub-quad-chunk-threshold 80 to webui-user as I saw 1 person using deep in another thread.
Don't know what these settings are really doing but I can now gen up to 5 images per batch with a very large speed increase without running out of memory and also getting a speed increase on low batch sizes. Previously could only do 1 or 2 images per batch.
Can also gen much higher resolutions, previous highest was around 640 x 640 now largest I've tried is 896 x 896 and no memory error.
There also appears to be no drop in quality so what's the downside and are there better paramaters to use for these settings?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions