CUDA Advanced Optimization — Deep Dive¶
Five techniques used by GPU engineers at NVIDIA, OpenAI, and Meta to push inference and HPC kernels to hardware limits. These go far beyond basic CUDA programming — they are what separates a "working" GPU kernel from a "production" one.
Why These Techniques Matter¶
Naive CUDA kernel: ~30% of hardware peak (common)
With kernel fusion: ~50% of hardware peak
With CUDA Graphs: +10-30% latency reduction
With cooperative groups: enables algorithms impossible without them
With persistent kernels: near-zero kernel launch overhead
With warp specialization: ~70-85% of hardware peak (elite)
Every LLM inference engine (TensorRT-LLM, vLLM, FasterTransformer, FlashAttention) uses all five.
Topic Index¶
| # | Topic | What It Solves |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | CUDA Graphs | CPU launch overhead kills latency at small batch sizes |
| 02 | Cooperative Groups | Thread block boundary limits synchronization flexibility |
| 03 | Persistent Kernels | Repeated kernel launches waste SM setup time |
| 04 | Kernel Fusion | Separate kernels waste HBM bandwidth on intermediate results |
| 05 | Warp Specialization | Compute and memory latency are not overlapped inside a kernel |
How They Relate¶
CUDA Graphs → reduces CPU↔GPU interface overhead
Cooperative Groups → enables flexible intra-kernel synchronization
Persistent Kernels → eliminates kernel launch overhead entirely
Kernel Fusion → reduces HBM round-trips between operations
Warp Specialization → overlaps compute and memory within a single kernel
Combined (e.g. FlashAttention-3):
Persistent kernel + warp specialization + cooperative groups
→ 90%+ of H200 BF16 peak on attention kernels
Quick Navigation¶
- LLM inference latency too high? → 01-CUDA-Graphs
- Writing a custom reduction/scan? → 02-Cooperative-Groups
- Kernel launch overhead visible in profile? → 03-Persistent-Kernels
- GPU memory bandwidth bottleneck? → 04-Kernel-Fusion
- Want to write FlashAttention-style kernels? → 05-Warp-Specialization