Confused about turboquant

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Hello,</p> <p>Anyone knows what are the differences and if they are really doing the job they say? Because i was watching something about

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Can someone ELI5? We've been using the same methods on both model and cache for a while (Q4_0/1, etc). </p> </div><!-- SC_ON --> &#32; submitted

<p>Building a production-ready, fault-tolerant Retrieval-Augmented Generation system is an exercise in managing harsh tradeoffs. You want massive context, lightning-fast hybrid

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Just read the google recent blog post they're claiming 6x KV cache compression with zero accuracy loss and up to 8x attention speedup on H100s.

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>Reading on the TurboQuant news makes me extremely excited for the future of local llm.</p> <p>When should we be expecting it?</p> <p>What are

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p><a href="https://x.com/i/status/2036533564158910740">https://x.com/i/status/2036533564158910740</a></p> </div><!-- SC_ON --> &#32; submitted by

<!-- SC_OFF --><div class="md"><p>wouldnt that have a drastic improvement??</p> </div><!-- SC_ON --> &#32; submitted by &#32; <a href="https://www.reddit.com/user/nothi69">

<table> <tr><td> <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/LocalLLaMA/comments/1s5cggh/google_turboquant_blew_up_for_kv_cache_heres/"> <img alt="Google TurboQuant blew up for KV cache.