Can you add more details to the model card?

#1
by bullerwins - opened

Like creation code, like in the FP8-Block version
https://huggingface.co/RedHatAI/gemma-4-31B-it-FP8-block

Red Hat AI org

Hi @bullerwins , added to bottom of model card. it's the same pathway but with different scheme

Which is more accurate, this or the block quant?

Red Hat AI org

Hi @qenme , the best choice between FP8 block and this is really dependent on your hardware. The benchmarks are preliminary, but you can see it achieves near-recovery with the dense model for the eval task at hand. The NVFP4 checkpoint is targeting NVIDIA GPUs with the Blackwell architecture

Hi @qenme , the best choice between FP8 block and this is really dependent on your hardware. The benchmarks are preliminary, but you can see it achieves near-recovery with the dense model for the eval task at hand. The NVFP4 checkpoint is targeting NVIDIA GPUs with the Blackwell architecture

Thanks for the response, that makes sense.

Prefacing with a sorry for the long wall of text incoming.

Second question, a little bit outside of the scope but while I have your attention... I've benchmarked many Gemma 4 31B variants trying to identify which ones have best KL divergence and same top p agreement %, but I am consistently noticing this model does not like KV cache or model quant. All of my tests were limited to llama-cpp because I don't know how to get these statistics from VLLM. I compared BF16 model + BF16 KV cache to every other variant mixing in 8 bit kv cache or 8 bit model, and they all have very bad results. Which is why I am surprised when I see accuracy benchmarks show that it's able to meet or get close to BF16 accuracy. I've seen others online also showing Gemma 4 is very sensitive to KV cache and model weight quant, so I don't think the issue is llama-cpp's statistics tools. I've even encountered strange outputs in many 8 bit quants which leads me to believe it's a real issue. I really like the model at BF16 but I can't run it at a big KV cache size. Unfortunately, this is very much outside my realm of expertise, so I am wondering if you've encountered this or know how to test for this in vLLM? Thanks again for your time and quanting the models!

Red Hat AI org

Hi @qenme , if you are running via llama-cpp support will be limited. vllm benchmark provides a lot of statistics, but you'd have to look into the docs to find what you're looking for, or alternatively https://github.com/vllm-project/guidellm

Hi @qenme , if you are running via llama-cpp support will be limited. vllm benchmark provides a lot of statistics, but you'd have to look into the docs to find what you're looking for, or alternatively https://github.com/vllm-project/guidellm

Thank you :)

Sign up or log in to comment