Saving GPU Hours in LLM Inference System Development and Online Workloads with Simulation and DBMS-Inspired Cache Replacement Policies

The rapid adoption of large language models (LLMs) has created significant challenges for efficient inference at scale. Unlike traditional workloads, LLM inference is constrained by both computation and the memory overhead of key-value (KV) caching, which accelerates decoding but quickly exhausts GPU memory. In this paper, we introduce the first queueing-theoretic framework that explicitly incorporates both computation and GPU memory constraints into the analysis of LLM inference. Based on this framework, we derive rigorous stability and instability conditions that determine whether an LLM inference service can sustain incoming demand without unbounded queue growth. This result offers a powerful tool for system deployment, potentially addressing the core challenge of GPU provisioning. By combining an estimated request arrival rate with our derived stable service rate, operators can calculate the necessary cluster size to avoid both costly over-purchasing and performance-violating under-provisioning. We further validate our theoretical predictions through extensive experiments in real GPU production environments. Our results show that the predicted stability conditions are highly accurate, with deviations typically within 10%.

Large Language Model (LLM) inference workloads are a rapidly growing contributor to data center energy consumption. Optimizing these deployments requires matching specific LLMs to the most efficient GPUs, but operators currently lack the tools to do so without exhaustively profiling each combination. While some predictive models exist, they still require profiling data and struggle to generalize to hardware unseen during training. To address this, we introduce \textit{WattGPU}, featuring two predictive models for mean GPU power draw and Inter-Token Latency (ITL). Our approach leverages only publicly available LLM metadata and GPU specifications, eliminating the need for hardware access or profiling while enabling generalization to unseen NVIDIA server-grade GPUs and LLMs. We evaluate our models using rigorous leave-one-GPU-out and leave-one-LLM-out cross-validation on a dataset of 42 open-source LLMs (0.1B--27B parameters) and 8 GPUs under both offline and server scenarios. The mean power draw model achieves a median absolute percentage error of $\leq3.4\%$ for offline and $\leq13.5\%$ for server scenarios on unseen GPUs, while the latency model achieves $\leq8.5\%$ in server mode, both maintaining strong GPU ranking correlations for server scenarios (Kendall $τ\geq0.76$). Compared to standard physically grounded baselines -- Load-Scaled Thermal Design Power (TDP) for power draw and roofline for latency -- our models reduce median absolute percentage error by approximately 4$\times$ on unseen LLM-GPU combinations for server scenarios or approximately 2$\times$ for completely unseen GPUs. WattGPU's data and code are publicly available at https://github.com/maufadel/wattgpu.

As large language models (LLMs) move into production serving, practitioners must rapidly evaluate inference performance across diverse hardware, models, and serving parameters to meet cost and latency targets. However, the end-to-end behavior of LLMs couples serving-layer policies with low-level GPU kernel execution and rapidly evolving architectures, forcing slow, deployment-specific benchmarking that is hard to generalize. We present KernelSight-LM, a fine-grained inference simulator that models token-level execution and produces kernel-level latency breakdowns. It decomposes each serving step into a roofline kernel model with a learned efficiency term, a communication model, and a host-overhead model, composed through a discrete-event scheduler that also captures mechanisms like prefix caching and continuous batching. KernelSight-LM offers two prediction tiers that trade target-GPU data for accuracy. The cross-generation tier uses no target-GPU measurements, only hardware specifications and kernel microbenchmarks from previously profiled GPUs, and predicts per-kernel latency on an unseen GPU generation to 12.1% error, a 1.8x improvement over the roofline baseline (22.0%). A second target-measured tier adds one model-agnostic kernel-microbenchmark sweep on the target GPU, sharpening per-kernel error to 3.8%, a 7.3x improvement over a comparable baseline (27.7%). Both tiers require far less target-GPU data than the prior systems they extend. In our simulator, these predictions yield end-to-end median (p50) errors across six model families of 15.4%, 12.8%, and 3.0% (TTFT, TPOT, throughput) in the cross-generation tier and 14.3%, 6.2%, and 2.7% in the target-measured tier, matching dedicated profiling tools while collecting far less on-device data. Beyond prediction, its kernel-level bottleneck breakdowns support hardware/software co-design and capacity planning.