Optimizing AutoResearch on RTX 5090: What Failed and What Worked

Initial Problems and Working Path
The initial setup for running AutoResearch on an RTX 5090/Blackwell system was "badly broken" with extremely poor performance—only a few thousand tokens per second and essentially useless MFU (Model FLOPs Utilization), despite the code technically running.
The working configuration path involved:
- Avoiding the broken full-model compile path on this setup
- Keeping the good fused optimizer compile improvements where they actually helped
- Using the stable SDPA/CuDNN attention path
- Tuning total batch and time budget empirically instead of guessing
- Automating the benchmark/extract/strategize/rerun loop
What Failed
Several failure modes were misleading:
- A path that was technically correct but catastrophically slow
- Misleading MFU interpretation until the denominator was corrected for the 5090 context
- Higher per-device batch settings that looked like they should help but actually made things much worse
- Automation bugs around lock cleanup/completion hooks/dispatch order
As the developer noted: "There were several ways to get a run that looked alive while doing something stupid."
What Helped
Real improvements came from:
- Re-enabling the fused optimizer compile path
- Reducing total batch from the original larger setting
- Validating 2**17 as the better total batch region
- Increasing time budget once the stable batch regime was found
- Treating automation as part of the benchmark system, not an afterthought
Performance Progression
The progression of useful runs showed clear improvements:
- Baseline healthy run: val_bpb: 1.165452, mfu: 40.49%
- Fused optimizer compile improvement: val_bpb: 1.155400, mfu: 42.88%
- TOTAL_BATCH_SIZE = 2**18: val_bpb: 1.108381, mfu: 43.18%
- TOTAL_BATCH_SIZE = 2**17 validation: val_bpb: 1.089424, mfu: 43.03%
- Best current auto-loop result: TOTAL_BATCH_SIZE = 2**17, TIME_BUDGET = 1200, LR multiplier = 1.0, val_bpb: 0.999445, mfu: 42.56%, total_tokens_M: 387.8, num_steps: 2959
Current Best Configuration
The best result found so far:
- TOTAL_BATCH_SIZE = 2**17
- TIME_BUDGET = 1200
- LR multiplier = 1.0
This combination beat larger batch variants, smaller 2**16 variant, a lower-LR test, and shorter training budgets.
Key Takeaways
The main lesson was that the winning configuration wasn't a "max everything" setup. The better path involved a stable batch regime, a longer training horizon, and careful elimination of automation and backend mistakes.
The developer emphasized that if you're working on Blackwell/5090 training and seeing bizarre behavior, "it may not be your imagination. Some paths are simply much worse than they first appear." The useful part of this exercise was finding a path that is stable, automatable, reproducible, and good enough to build real follow-on experiments on top of.
📖 Read the full source: r/LocalLLaMA
👀 See Also

Methodology for Consistent Benchmarking of Local vs Cloud LLMs
A developer shares a measurement setup using sequential requests and rule-based scoring to compare local models (via llama.cpp, vLLM, Ollama) with cloud APIs (GPT-5.4, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro) through a unified endpoint like ZenMux.

OpenClaw Cost Optimization: Five Settings for Continuous Agent Usage
A developer running OpenClaw continuously on a Raspberry Pi identified five configuration settings that significantly reduced agent costs by optimizing for cost rather than default capability.

Building a serverless AI agent platform on AWS for $0.01/month with Claude Code
A developer built a complete AWS serverless platform running AI agents for approximately $0.01/month using Claude Code over 29 hours, eliminating expensive components like NAT Gateway ($32/month) and ALB ($18/month). The project includes 233 unit tests, 35 E2E tests, and deploys with a single cdk deploy command.

A Management Framework for Leading AI Agents Effectively
A former backend lead identifies a plateau in AI agent productivity and proposes a framework based on three disciplines: cybernetics, information theory, and management. The framework details two operational modes: the Captain and the Architect.