Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.14255

Simulate Before You Scale: High-Fidelity LLM Inference Planning Without GPUs

Abstract

Deploying large language model (LLM) inference at scale requires jointly selecting hardware layout, parallelism strategy, scheduling policy, admission control, and request routing to meet latency and throughput targets. These choices interact: a routing decision that improves cache locality can concentrate load, and an admission threshold that triggers only at saturation allows queues to grow deep enough to degrade critical-tier traffic. Evaluating candidates on GPU clusters is too expensive for iterative exploration, yet existing predictive tools either ignore batching and queueing dynamics or model only fragments of the pipeline. In this paper, we present BLIS, a deterministic, CPU-only discrete-event simulator that models the full inference serving pipeline (admission, routing, scheduling, prefill/decode execution, KV-cache management, and preemption). BLIS pairs analytical basis functions with learned scaling coefficients and overhead terms, fit once globally, to predict step latency without per-model or per-GPU profiling. Across 36 experiments spanning six models and three GPU types, BLIS achieves 6.7% median end-to-end error while running around 200 times faster than real execution. In a configuration search over 420 serving configurations for Llama-2-70B, BLIS identifies a 4-GPU deployment that meets a 300ms mean TTFT service-level objective (SLO), whereas competing tools either require double the GPUs or recommend configurations that fail under load. Two policies evolved entirely in simulation were validated on real hardware and merged into llm-d, a widely adopted open-source platform for distributed LLM serving: an admission policy that reduces critical-tier TTFT P90 by up to 82%, and a flow-control policy that reduces E2E P50 latency by 32-48% on overloaded workloads.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Dipanwita Guhathakurta, Mert Toslali, Srinivasan Parthasarathy, Jing Chen, Michael Kalantar, Nicholas A. Masluk, Vishakha Ramani, Asser Tantawi, Fabio Oliveira. 2026-10-09. Simulate Before You Scale: High-Fidelity LLM Inference Planning Without GPUs. https://doi.org/10.1145/3857382

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Caching Policies based on Object Sizes

We evaluate eviction policies that consider the lengths of the objects being cached for different cache sizes (cost) and different workloads. Workloads include the Independent Reference Model and real-world production traces. In particular, hybrid policies are considered for segmented caches. A working-set approximation is developed for SIEVE as well as its length-aware extension.

cs.PF↗

Top-Down Microarchitecture Analysis Without Causal Modelling Is Dangerous!

Top-Down Microarchitecture Analysis (TMA) is the standard for identifying CPU bottlenecks. However, TMA implicitly models performance via a single causal path: Workload(dataset, algorithm) => CPU(CPI) => System(Performance) (microarchitectural efficiency path). It overlooks two hidden causal paths: Workload(dataset, algorithm) => Instructions(Retired) => System(Performance) (algorithmic efficiency path) and Workload(dataset, algorithm) => Instructions(Retired) => CPU(CPI) => System(Performance) (microarchitecture-algorithm efficiency path). This causal blindness often misleads architects into futile hardware optimizations. To address this, we propose Causal Top-Down Microarchitecture Analysis (CTMA). Utilizing the object causal model, CTMA explicitly models these three causal paths among the workload, instructions, CPU, and system. We validate CTMA across Intel, AMD, and ARM platforms. Our experiments reveal counterintuitive insights: (1) CPI Profiling Blindness: Algorithmic instruction bloat can double elapsed time while the CPI profile remains frozen. (2) Over-Speculation Congestion: Throttling the Frontend paradoxically improves performance in pointer-chasing algorithms. (3) ILP Window Collapse: Extreme data topologies shift bottlenecks from Backend ROB capacity to Frontend fill-rate starvation. (4) Op-Cache SMT Overlap: Ultra-small footprints yield SMT speedups on Intel but cause severe thrashing on AMD. (5) "Ghost State" Artifact: Stale pipeline mitigations on Intel Xeon Gold 5120T artificially boost performance by 22.75% on SPEC CPU2017 and 42.2% on SPEC CPU2026. Based on this, we propose a dynamic speculation throttling mechanism.

cs.PF↗

How the Dirty Set Moves: Characterizing Schedule Reuse in Incremental Sparse Matrix Multiplication

Sparse matrices, in which most entries are zero, are central to scientific simulation, graph analytics and machine learning, and their multiplication with dense inputs is a core parallel kernel. In many applications the matrix stays fixed while only a few input rows change per step, so the result can be updated from those rows alone, which we call the dirty set. Sparse kernels often add a second optimization based on the inspector-executor principle, in which a tiled schedule is prepared once and reused across calls. However, when this reuse remains profitable as the dirty set moves is not well characterized. In this paper, we show that retained tiled execution rarely beats direct CSC in incremental sparse matrix multiplication, although incremental execution itself remains highly profitable. Across 21 SuiteSparse matrices and controlled patterns of motion, a direct column-wise incremental update is 2.1-8.2x faster than the best of eight full-recomputation codes, among them Intel oneMKL and PyTorch. Yet the same direct update outperforms a tiled executor that retains tile preparation and caches assembled schedules in 779 of 837 workloads. Separating reuse into per-tile preparation and cached schedules shows that the benefit comes from preparation; extra cache capacity seldom helps because a tile set rarely returns after a different one has intervened. Tiling is faster only when tiles merge many entries into each output write, a structural property that we predicted before measurement and confirmed on four held-out matrices of the same family. These results show that the structure of the matrix and the motion of the dirty set, rather than the sophistication of the schedule, determine whether reuse is profitable. We anticipate that our methodology and guidelines will help developers decide when to build schedule reuse into incremental sparse runtimes.

cs.PF↗