Post
1807
llama.cpp is 26.8% faster than ollama.
I have upgraded both, and using the same settings, I am running the same DeepSeek R1 Distill 1.5B on the same hardware. It's an Apples to Apples comparison.
Total duration:
llama.cpp 6.85 sec <- 26.8% faster
ollama 8.69 sec
Breakdown by phase:
Model loading
llama.cpp 241 ms <- 2x faster
ollama 553 ms
Prompt processing
llama.cpp 416.04 tokens/s with an eval time 45.67 ms <- 10x faster
ollama 42.17 tokens/s with an eval time of 498 ms
Token generation
llama.cpp 137.79 tokens/s with an eval time 6.62 sec <- 13% faster
ollama 122.07 tokens/s with an eval time 7.64 sec
llama.cpp is LLM inference in C/C++; ollama adds abstraction layers and marketing.
Make sure you own your AI. AI in the cloud is not aligned with you; it's aligned with the company that owns it.
I have upgraded both, and using the same settings, I am running the same DeepSeek R1 Distill 1.5B on the same hardware. It's an Apples to Apples comparison.
Total duration:
llama.cpp 6.85 sec <- 26.8% faster
ollama 8.69 sec
Breakdown by phase:
Model loading
llama.cpp 241 ms <- 2x faster
ollama 553 ms
Prompt processing
llama.cpp 416.04 tokens/s with an eval time 45.67 ms <- 10x faster
ollama 42.17 tokens/s with an eval time of 498 ms
Token generation
llama.cpp 137.79 tokens/s with an eval time 6.62 sec <- 13% faster
ollama 122.07 tokens/s with an eval time 7.64 sec
llama.cpp is LLM inference in C/C++; ollama adds abstraction layers and marketing.
Make sure you own your AI. AI in the cloud is not aligned with you; it's aligned with the company that owns it.
