cs.DCMar 5, 2026

Why Smaller Is Slower? Dimensional Misalignment in Compressed LLMs

Authors: Jihao Xin, Tian Lyu, Qilong Pan, Kesen Wang, Marco Canini

Organizations: KAUST · HUMAIN

Abstract

Post-training compression reduces LLM parameter counts but often produces irregular tensor dimensions that degrade GPU performance -- a phenomenon we call dimensional misalignment. We present a full-stack analysis tracing root causes at three levels: framework, library, and hardware. The key insight is that model inference becomes slower because the resulting dimensions are unfriendly with the GPU execution stack. For example, compressing Llama-3-8B with activation-aware singular value decomposition (ASVD) has 15% fewer parameters yet runs no faster than the uncompressed baseline, because 95% of its dimensions are misaligned. We propose GAC (GPU-Aligned Compression), a new compression paradigm that wraps any dimension-reducing compressor and re-selects hardware-aligned dimensions via multi-choice knapsack optimization under the same parameter budget. We evaluate GAC on Llama-3-8B with ASVD and LLM-Pruner, achieving 100% alignment and recovering up to 1.5×\times speedup while preserving model quality.

Figures & tables

Appendix figures & tables4 assets

Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.

Appendix

Explore similar work

Sep 16, 2026

Layer-wise Curriculum Learning for Efficient LLM Compression

In this paper, we introduce layer-wise curriculum learning for efficient LLM compression. The proposed method facilitates the knowledge transfer from the teacher model to the student model, utilizing a curriculum learning approach that begins with easier optimization tasks and progressively tackles harder ones. In order to adopt the layer-wise learning in LLM compression, we partition the whole model into multiple segments consisting of layers, thereby enabling more computationally efficient knowledge transfer for LLMs. Based on our theoretical analysis of cumulative error phenomenon, layer-wise curriculum learning accelerates convergence while stabilizing the knowledge transfer process. In addition, we present a feature caching method with a multi-threading strategy to efficiently address feature misalignment across layers, maximizing GPU utilization. Consequently, our method exhibits advanced model compression performance, as well as high computational efficiency in terms of minimized memory usage and short training hours. Experiments on multiple datasets show that the proposed method achieves state-of-the-art performance while reducing GPU memory usage and training hours by more than 50% on BERT and GPT-2. Moreover, it outperforms the other pruning methods on LLaMA-family and Qwen models under the same training hours, with a lower GPU memory footprint.
Mar 18, 2026

ZipServ: Fast and Memory-Efficient LLM Inference with Hardware-Aware Lossless Compression

Lossless model compression holds tremendous promise for alleviating the memory and bandwidth bottlenecks in bit-exact Large Language Model (LLM) serving. However, existing approaches often result in substantial inference slowdowns due to fundamental design mismatches with GPU architectures: at the kernel level, variable-length bitstreams produced by traditional entropy codecs break SIMT parallelism; at the system level, decoupled pipelines lead to redundant memory traffic. We present ZipServ, a lossless compression framework co-designed for efficient LLM inference. ZipServ introduces Tensor-Core-Aware Triple Bitmap Encoding (TCA-TBE), a novel fixed-length format that enables constant-time, parallel decoding, together with a fused decompression-GEMM (ZipGEMM) kernel that decompresses weights on-the-fly directly into Tensor Core registers. This "load-compressed, compute-decompressed" design eliminates intermediate buffers and maximizes compute intensity. Experiments show that ZipServ reduces the model size by up to 30%, achieves up to 2.21x kernel-level speedup over NVIDIA's cuBLAS, and expedites end-to-end inference by an average of 1.22x over vLLM. ZipServ is the first lossless compression system that provides both storage savings and substantial acceleration for LLM inference on GPUs.
Aug 25, 2026

More GPUs or a Smaller Cache? Tensor Parallelism versus KV Compression for Memory-Bound LLM Serving

When an LLM serving deployment runs out of KVcache room, there are two well-established ways out. Tensor parallelism shards the weights and the KV cache across two, four, or eight devices, buying memory headroom at the price of an all-reduce on every layer and a hardware bill that grows with the device count. The algorithms community shrinks the cache in place, with KV quantisation and eviction keeping a single GPU and spending a little quality instead. Compression papers report memory ratios, parallel-scaling papers report throughput curves, and almost nobody puts the two on the same cost axis. We place tensor-parallel configurations (degree 1 to 8) and KV-compressed configurations (16/8/4-bit, keep-ratios down to 0.25) on one costnormalised axis, cost per million tokens against latency, using a profiled simulator calibrated on A100, A40, and H100 hardware, and we go looking for the cost-equivalence crossover. We do not find one. Across two models (Llama-2 at 7B and 70B), three GPU types, and every level of memory relief we could construct, compression is cheaper by 1.20x to 2.00x. A 7B model on an 80 GB device cannot exhaust its KV budget within its own context window, and the boundary that decides between the strategies is model size relative to device memory, at roughly 36B parameters for an 80 GB card. Below that wall, compression dominates and extra GPUs are largely wasted spend; above it, tensor parallelism stops being a choice and becomes an entry ticket: Llama-2-70B is infeasible on one A100 at any KV setting, because the binding resource is weights, which KV compression does not touch. Tensor parallelism is the only lever that improves latency (compression makes per-token latency worse, by 8 to 93%, through batching contention), while compression is the only lever that multiplies capacity per dollar (16.5x, against 1.21x for an eightfold spend on GPUs).