* mergable fast RDNA3 Qwen 3.6 * AMD * quant 256 multiple * cleanup cast * llm kernels: adapt to Ops.BIND removal Variables are 0-d ALU BUFFERs in the tensor graph and take the ALU PARAM form inside kernels (UOp.variable(param=True)). Add kernel_var helper for the conversion, and keep start_pos in bound form at the graph level so function implicit-input collection and the schedule's binds rename-back line up. * adaptive prefill chunk sizes for recurrent models + iq4xs model entry one TinyJit per static prefill chunk size: capture 128 and 32 at warmup, generate picks the largest that fits the remaining prompt. long prompts prefill 2x faster (555 tok/s on Qwen3.6-27B IQ4_XS) without pushing short prompts through token-by-token decode. * minimize diff: early-return custom attention path, keep master state init * minimize: master _attention with gated fused-scan swap, kernels/amd only, single chunk size - GatedDeltaNetBlock._attention keeps master's symbolic-padding structure; the recurrent scan is swapped for the fused gated_delta_prefill kernel only on RDNA3 with static shapes (fast_scan), everything else uses the old path - all AMD kernel code lives in tinygrad/llm/kernels/amd.py (drop kernels/__init__.py, drop the generic fallback kernel - the old scan covers non-RDNA3) - single prefill chunk size 32; non-RDNA3 recurrent keeps master's chunk_size=1 - the conv+normalize miscompile doesn't trigger with master's window-buffer conv, so the contiguous workaround is dropped * warmup: single code path for fast and old recurrent * drop fast_scan/fast_recurrent flags, inline the RDNA3 gate (cached) * generate: chunk size is always 32, no device gating static chunks for recurrent models everywhere: the fused kernel path on RDNA3, the old scan elsewhere (which is also faster chunked than token-by-token) * warmup: drop redundant _init_state loop (lazy init in the eager step covers it) * symbolic-length prefill with the custom kernels the prefill path is fully symbolic again (master's generate, one prefill graph for every chunk size, no static-tail decode): padded steps are exact no-ops in the scan (beta=0, alpha=exp(0)=1), flash attention positions queries at start_pos instead of valid_kv_len-M, and quant linears pad to the chunk bucket prefill 401 tok: 284 -> 348 tok/s on Qwen3.8-27B IQ4_XS (tail chunks no longer decode token-by-token), decode unchanged at 45 tok/s * cli: default qwen3.6:27b to the fast IQ4_XS quant, add qwen3.8:27b Q4_K_M falls back to slow inline dequant with the custom kernels, IQ4_XS is the fast path. qwen3.8 quants use unsloth's UD (dynamic) naming * warmup: back to master's two-liner plus a cache reset with symbolic prefill, generate([0])'s 1-token chunk captures the symbolic prefill graph that serves every chunk size, and JIT batching on capture measurably doesn't matter with the fused kernels (347.7 tok/s either way) * cli: pin qwen3.8:27b to the pre-UD revision the UD-IQ4_XS replacement mixes in Q3_K tensors (ggml type 11) the loader doesn't support; the pinned revision is byte-identical to the known-good file * warmup: identical to master the leftover cache is self-consistent: get_start_pos only reuses a full strict-prefix match, everything else restarts with a state reset * model: hoist the quantized_attention import to the top level * hoist the GDN query scale out of the branch, restore master dtype.py the scale is the same op in both paths, apply it once after the transpose. the dtype.py diff was a stale pre-SPEC=2 copy, not intentional work * gated_delta_prefill: don't pass the bound start_pos as a call src device-less param buffers in call srcs crash hcq2's _get_enqueue_devs. the var already reaches the graph through the state AFTER chain (conv state store), same as the flash kernels' valid_end * llm: half KV cache with custom flash kernels, drop the int8 quantized cache matches master's new half cache default: no scales, no packing, one less buffer. the store casts to half explicitly (buffer-only half usage misses the renderer's half define). 45.5 tok/s decode, 348.7 tok/s prefill — same as int8 * llm: zero-init the KV cache the int8 path was accidentally protected from uninitialized memory by its zero-initialized scale buffer; with a plain half cache the flash prefill kernel's P*V wmma computes 0*NaN=NaN on masked lanes past the valid region (manifested as garbage tokens at 32k context where the allocator reuses dirty VRAM) * gate that * llm/kernels/amd: reorganize by kernel family, drop the clutter sections: shared helpers, quant linear, flash attention, gated delta prefill. no AxisType.WEAK (default), no ALLOW_DEVICE_USAGE override (unneeded), magic numbers become names (QUANT_SIZES, Q5_K/Q6_K/IQ4_XS), merged wrapper layers (flash_attention_causal_cached folded into flash_attention), one _unbind helper for the bound-var dance * test: universal recurrent reuse assertion, fix lambda lint * 1-token chunks have a static shape: they are decode steps a 1-token chunk routes to the decode graph via the existing dispatch, so warmup and decode-only workloads never build the big symbolic prefill graph: CI benchmark command 12m50s -> 5m29s (master: 6m48s), 220 -> 123 compile jobs also restores the ALLOW_DEVICE_USAGE override in amd_custom_kernels_supported: Device[] asserts inside @function contexts (ALLOW_DEVICE_USAGE=0), and the first gate call can happen there depending on test order * generate: back to plain symbolic binding, the static-1 rule wasn't worth it * custom kernels: Q4_K support (ggml type 12) Q4_K is Q5_K without the high-bit array: same d/dmin/scales layout (so _q5_scales works unchanged), 144-byte blocks, qs at word 4. both the dp4a decode kernel and the WMMA prefill kernel take a ggml_type branch now. Qwen3-8B Q4_K_M: decode 16.5 -> 114.8 tok/s, prefill 69 -> 536 tok/s * raise line count to 26500 (qwen did it) * benchmark qwen3.8 * little updates
tinygrad: For something between PyTorch and karpathy/micrograd. Maintained by tiny corp.
tinygrad is an end-to-end deep learning stack:
- Tensor library with autograd
- IR and compiler that fuse and lower kernels
- JIT + graph execution
- nn / optim / datasets for real training
It’s inspired by PyTorch (ergonomics), JAX (functional transforms and IR-based AD), and TVM (scheduling and codegen), but stays intentionally tiny and hackable.
How tinygrad compares
PyTorch
- ✅ Similar: eager
TensorAPI, autograd,optim, basic datasets and layers. - ✅ You can write familiar training loops.
- 🔁 Unlike PyTorch, the entire compiler and IR are visible and hackable.
JAX
- ✅ IR-based autodiff over primitives (like JAXPR + XLA).
- ✅ Function-level JIT (
TinyJit) that captures and replays kernels. - 🔁 Fewer functional transforms (no full
vmap/pmapyet), but far easier to read.
TVM
- ✅ Multiple lowering passes, scheduling, and BEAM search over kernels.
- ✅ Device “graphs” for batched execution.
- 🔁 tinygrad also ships the front-end framework (tensors, nn, optim), not just the compiler.
Laziness
Try a matmul. See how, despite the style, it is fused into one kernel with the power of laziness.
DEBUG=3 python3 -c "from tinygrad import Tensor;
N = 1024; a, b = Tensor.empty(N, N), Tensor.empty(N, N);
(a.reshape(N, 1, N) * b.T.reshape(1, N, N)).sum(axis=2).realize()"
And we can change DEBUG to 4 to see the generated code.
Neural networks
As it turns out, 90% of what you need for neural networks are a decent autograd/tensor library. Throw in an optimizer, a data loader, and some compute, and you have all you need.
from tinygrad import Tensor, nn, Context
class LinearNet:
def __init__(self):
self.l1 = Tensor.kaiming_uniform(784, 128)
self.l2 = Tensor.kaiming_uniform(128, 10)
def __call__(self, x:Tensor) -> Tensor:
return x.flatten(1).dot(self.l1).relu().dot(self.l2)
model = LinearNet()
optim = nn.optim.Adam([model.l1, model.l2], lr=0.001)
x, y = Tensor.rand(4, 1, 28, 28), Tensor([2,4,3,7]) # replace with real mnist dataloader
with Context(TRAINING=1):
for i in range(10):
optim.zero_grad()
loss = model(x).sparse_categorical_crossentropy(y).backward()
optim.step()
print(i, loss.item())
See examples/beautiful_mnist.py for the full version that gets 98% in ~5 seconds
Accelerators
tinygrad already supports numerous accelerators, including:
And it is easy to add more! Your accelerator of choice only needs to support a total of ~25 low level ops.
To check default accelerator run: python3 -c "from tinygrad import Device; print(Device.DEFAULT)"
Installation
The current recommended way to install tinygrad is from source.
From source
git clone https://github.com/tinygrad/tinygrad.git
cd tinygrad
python3 -m pip install -e .
Direct (master)
python3 -m pip install git+https://github.com/tinygrad/tinygrad.git
Documentation
Documentation along with a quick start guide can be found on the docs website built from the docs/ directory.
Quick example comparing to PyTorch
from tinygrad import Tensor
x = Tensor.eye(3).clone() # clone to make it a buffer
y = Tensor([[2.0,0,-2.0]])
z = y.matmul(x).sum()
z.backward()
print(x.grad.tolist()) # dz/dx
print(y.grad.tolist()) # dz/dy
The same thing but in PyTorch:
import torch
x = torch.eye(3, requires_grad=True)
y = torch.tensor([[2.0,0,-2.0]], requires_grad=True)
z = y.matmul(x).sum()
z.backward()
print(x.grad.tolist()) # dz/dx
print(y.grad.tolist()) # dz/dy
Contributing
There has been a lot of interest in tinygrad lately. Following these guidelines will help your PR get accepted. If you do submit a PR, please include a sentence or two about why you want this merged and why you think it will improve the project.
If you are a new contributor with something that looks even close to AI written, it will be closed without feedback and you may be banned from our GitHub. No human should waste time reading AI slop. And for everyone, if you used AI, disclose what you used it for.
We'll start with what will get your PR closed with a pointer to this section:
- No code golf! While low line count is a guiding light of this project, anything that remotely looks like code golf will be closed. The true goal is reducing complexity and increasing readability, and deleting
\ns does nothing to help with that. - All docs and whitespace changes will be closed unless you are a well-known contributor. The people writing the docs should be those who know the codebase the absolute best. People who have not demonstrated that shouldn't be messing with docs. Whitespace changes are both useless and carry a risk of introducing bugs.
- Anything you claim is a "speedup" must be benchmarked. In general, the goal is simplicity, so even if your PR makes things marginally faster, you have to consider the tradeoff with maintainability and readability.
- In general, the code outside the core
tinygrad/folder is not well tested, so unless the current code there is broken, you shouldn't be changing it. - If your PR looks "complex", is a big diff, or adds lots of lines, it won't be reviewed or merged. Consider breaking it up into smaller PRs that are individually clear wins. A common pattern I see is prerequisite refactors before adding new functionality. If you can (cleanly) refactor to the point that the feature is a 3 line change, this is great, and something easy for us to review.
Now, what we want:
- Bug fixes (with a regression test) are great! This library isn't 1.0 yet, so if you stumble upon a bug, fix it, write a test, and submit a PR, this is valuable work.
- Solving bounties! tinygrad offers cash bounties for certain improvements to the library. All new code should be high quality and well tested.
- Features. However, if you are adding a feature, consider the line tradeoff. If it's 3 lines, there's less of a bar of usefulness it has to meet over something that's 30 or 300 lines. All features must have regression tests. In general with no other constraints, your feature's API should match torch or numpy.
- Refactors that are clear wins. In general, if your refactor isn't a clear win it will be closed. But some refactors are amazing! Think about readability in a deep core sense. A whitespace change or moving a few functions around is useless, but if you realize that two 100 line functions can actually use the same 110 line function with arguments while also improving readability, this is a big win. Refactors should pass process replay.
- Tests/fuzzers. If you can add tests that are non brittle, they are welcome. We have some fuzzers in here too, and there's a plethora of bugs that can be found with them and by improving them. Finding bugs, even writing broken tests (that should pass) with
@unittest.expectedFailureis great. This is how we make progress. - Dead code removal from core
tinygrad/folder. We don't care about the code in extra, but removing dead code from the core library is great. Less for new people to read and be confused by.
Running tests
You should install the pre-commit hooks with pre-commit install. This will run the linter, mypy, and a subset of the tests on every commit.
For more examples on how to run the full test suite please refer to the CI workflow.
Some examples of running tests locally:
python3 -m pip install -e '.[testing]' # install extra deps for testing
python3 test/backend/test_ops.py # just the ops tests
python3 -m pytest test/ # whole test suite
For agents, always run tests with -n12 for speed.
Process replay tests
Process replay compares your PR's generated kernels against master. If your PR is a refactor or speedup without any expected behavior change, It should include [pr] in the pull request title.