Blog
GPU ResNet-50 inference: OpenNN vs PyTorch vs TensorFlow
Across five RTX 4080 runs, OpenNN reaches 107.2k fp32 and 177.0k bf16 ResNet-50 inference samples/s: 1.23x and 1.42x PyTorch, respectively.
OpenNN
Benchmarks, platform notes, and technical articles from the OpenNN team.
Blog
Across five RTX 4080 runs, OpenNN reaches 107.2k fp32 and 177.0k bf16 ResNet-50 inference samples/s: 1.23x and 1.42x PyTorch, respectively.
Blog
On an RTX 4080, OpenNN bf16 improves throughput by 1.26x to 2.37x across Transformer and dense inference and training workloads.
Blog
With Intel oneMKL on eight i9-12900K P-core threads, OpenNN reaches 441.5k HIGGS samples/s: 1.21x PyTorch and 1.22x TensorFlow CPU inference throughput.
Blog
With CUDA Graphs active under a symmetric device-resident protocol, OpenNN reaches 15.34M fp32 and 34.84M bf16 HIGGS samples/s: 1.42x PyTorch in fp32 and about 1.10x both frameworks in…
Blog
Across five runs per cell, OpenNN leads all six GPU Transformer inference configurations, reaching 680.4k tok/s and up to 1.52x PyTorch and 2.10x TensorFlow.
Blog
OpenNN reaches 1.69M tokens/s in fp32 and 2.67M tokens/s in bf16 Transformer training on an RTX 4080.
Blog
OpenNN trains ResNet-50 at 29,069 images/s in fp32 and 35,097 images/s in bf16 on an RTX 4080.
Blog
On Windows with an NVIDIA GPU, OpenNN keeps its full native-CUDA path while rival frameworks GPU support is incomplete. A capability comparison.
Blog
Under a fixed RAM budget, OpenNN loads and trains on about 2.7x more tabular data than the usual pandas-to-tensor path used before PyTorch or TensorFlow.
Blog
Time-to-first-prediction compared: OpenNN returns its first result far faster than PyTorch or TensorFlow, the cost that matters for short, frequent runs.
Blog
OpenNN deploys as one native executable, while PyTorch and TensorFlow require larger Python package trees and framework runtimes.
Blog
OpenNN matches the predictive accuracy of PyTorch and TensorFlow on a controlled nonlinear regression benchmark, while keeping a much smaller native footprint.