InternLM-XComposer TPS calculator
Each card below is assessed against this model at the context length and minimum quality you choose. Speed is an estimate for a single request, calculated from the card's memory bandwidth and the size of the model once compressed.
Calculated for this model
818 cards we hold specifications for
Smallest card that fits
Tesla K20c
5 GB · Q3_K_M · 28.9 tok/s
Fastest card
B200
484 tok/s · 180 GB
Which GPUs can run InternLM-XComposer?
Set the inputs, read the answer
A longer conversation needs more memory, which can push this model off smaller cards.
Hides cards that would only fit the model by compressing it below this point.
589 cards match
Calculating| Needs | Quantisation | Fit | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
484
tok/s
290–774 · low confidence |
B200 NVIDIA | 180 GB | 8,000 GB/s | Jan 2024 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
484
tok/s
290–774 · low confidence |
B300 NVIDIA | 288 GB | 8,000 GB/s | Sep 2025 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
387
tok/s
232–618 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI350X AMD | 288 GB | 8,190 GB/s | Jan 2025 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
387
tok/s
232–618 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI355X AMD | 288 GB | 8,190 GB/s | Jan 2025 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
309
tok/s
185–495 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI300 AMD | 128 GB | 6,550 GB/s | Jan 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
296
tok/s
178–473 · low confidence |
H200 NVL NVIDIA | 141 GB | 4,890 GB/s | Nov 2024 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
296
tok/s
178–473 · low confidence |
H200 SXM 141 GB NVIDIA | 141 GB | 4,890 GB/s | Nov 2024 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
283
tok/s
170–453 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI325X AMD | 256 GB | 6,000 GB/s | Oct 2024 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
251
tok/s
151–402 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI300A AMD | 128 GB | 5,325 GB/s | Dec 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
251
tok/s
151–402 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI300X AMD | 192 GB | 5,325 GB/s | Dec 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
251
tok/s
151–402 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI308X AMD | 192 GB | 5,325 GB/s | Dec 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
238
tok/s
143–381 · low confidence |
H100 NVL 94 GB NVIDIA | 94 GB | 3,940 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
203
tok/s
122–325 · low confidence |
H100 PCIe 96 GB NVIDIA | 96 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
203
tok/s
122–325 · low confidence |
H100 SXM5 80 GB NVIDIA | 80 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Oct 2022 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
203
tok/s
122–325 · low confidence |
H100 SXM5 94 GB NVIDIA | 94 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
203
tok/s
122–325 · low confidence |
H100 SXM5 96 GB NVIDIA | 96 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
203
tok/s
122–325 · low confidence |
H800 SXM5 NVIDIA | 80 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
155
tok/s
93–248 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI250 AMD | 128 GB | 3,280 GB/s | Nov 2021 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
155
tok/s
93–248 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI250X AMD | 128 GB | 3,280 GB/s | Nov 2021 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
131
tok/s
79–210 · low confidence |
CMP 170HX 8 GB NVIDIA | 8 GB | 1,490 GB/s | Sep 2021 | 6.6 GB | Q6_K | Tight |
|
129
tok/s
77–206 · low confidence |
Data Center GPU Max 1550 Intel | 128 GB | 3,280 GB/s | Jan 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
126
tok/s
76–202 · low confidence |
Data Center GPU Max Subsystem Intel | 128 GB | 3,210 GB/s | Jan 2023 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
123
tok/s
74–197 · low confidence |
A100 SXM4 80 GB NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Nov 2020 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
123
tok/s
74–197 · low confidence |
A100X NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Jun 2021 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
123
tok/s
74–197 · low confidence |
A800 SXM4 80 GB NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Aug 2022 | 8.2 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
Speeds are estimates for a single request — one conversation at a time — calculated from memory bandwidth, model size and quantisation. Real throughput varies with the inference runtime and its version. Figures published by hardware vendors measure many simultaneous requests and are much higher.
On record
Full specification
Everything on record for this model. Most of it describes how it was trained rather than how it runs — useful context for judging how much work went into it, and how it compares with models built at a different scale.
Origin
Who built this model, where, and when it was published.
- Organisation
- Shanghai AI Lab
- Organisation type
- Academia
- Country
- China
- Published
- 26 September 2023
- Authors
- Pan Zhang, Xiaoyi Dong, Bin Wang, Yuhang Cao, Chao Xu, Linke Ouyang, Zhiyuan Zhao, Haodong Duan, Songyang Zhang, Shuangrui Ding, Wenwei Zhang, Hang Yan, Xinyue Zhang, Wei Li, Jingwen Li, Kai Chen, Conghui He, Xingcheng Zhang, Yu Qiao, Dahua Lin, Jiaqi Wang
What it does
The problem areas the model was built for. A model can carry several of each.
- Domain
- Multimodal, Language, Vision
- Task
- Chat, Visual question answering, Translation
- Approach
- Supervised fine-tuning (SFT)
- Base model
- InternLM
Size
How large the model is and how much data it was trained on. Parameters are the figure that decides whether it fits on a given graphics card.
- Parameters
- 7B
- Training data
- 125,604,608,000 tokens
7B from https://huggingface.co/internlm/internlm-xcomposer-vl-7b
from appendix A.1 55.6B English tokens and 22.1B Chineese tokens and 1.1B images. "images are resized to a consistent dimension of 224 × 224 and subsequently dissected into patches with a stride of 14. These patches serve as input tokens" There are 224^2 / 14^2 = 256 patches (tokens) per image. So 55.6e9 + 22.1e9 + 256*1.1e9 = 359.3e9
Training compute
The arithmetic performed to train the model, measured in floating-point operations. It is a measure of what the training run cost, not of how fast the finished model answers you.
- Training compute
- 5.3 × 10²¹ FLOP
- How it was established
- Hardware,Operation counting
- Fine-tuning compute
- 3.5 × 10²¹ FLOP
"The training procedure employs a batch size of approximately 15.7 million tokens and spans 8,000 iterations" 6ND = 6 * 7B params * 15.7M tokens/iteration * 8000 iterations = 5.28e21 FLOP
flops = (128) * (312 * 10**12) * (80 * 3600) * (0.3) = 3.45e21 (num gpu) * (peak flops) * (time in seconds) * (assumed utilization rate) from section A.1 we have 128xA100 used for 80 hours
The training run
What it physically took to train: which chips, how many, for how long, and what that drew from the wall.
- Training hardware
- NVIDIA A100
- Chips used
- 128
- Chip-hours
- 10,240
- Wall-clock time
- 80 hours
- Hardware utilisation
- MFU 45.9%
- Power draw
- 101.7 kW
from appendix A.1
MFU: 5.28e21 FLOP / (128 A100s * 80 hours * 60 * 60) / (312e12 FLOP/s/A100) ~= 0.4591
Availability
Whether you can obtain the model and run it on your own hardware, which is what decides if any of the graphics-card figures on this page apply.
- Weights
- Open — downloadable
- Model access
- Open weights (restricted use)
- Training code
- Open source
code is apache 2.0 weights allow for free commercial use, apply for full commercial license https://github.com/InternLM/InternLM-XComposer
How it is classified
Labels the source dataset applies when tracking notable models, and how confident it is in the entry.
- Record confidence
- Confident
- Citations
- 341
Sources
Where this record came from and when it was last checked.
- Reference
- InternLM-XComposer: A Vision-Language Large Model for Advanced Text-image Comprehension and Composition
- Last updated
- 25 May 2026
The extremes
The ten fastest GPUs that run InternLM-XComposer
Ranked by estimated tokens per second, newest card first where speeds tie. Because generation is bound by memory bandwidth, this ordering follows bandwidth rather than any gaming benchmark.
- 01 B300 288 GB · 8,000 GB/s · Q8_0 484 tok/s
- 02 B200 180 GB · 8,000 GB/s · Q8_0 484 tok/s
- 03 Radeon Instinct MI350X 288 GB · 8,190 GB/s · Q8_0 387 tok/s
- 04 Radeon Instinct MI355X 288 GB · 8,190 GB/s · Q8_0 387 tok/s
- 05 Radeon Instinct MI300 128 GB · 6,550 GB/s · Q8_0 309 tok/s
- 06 H200 NVL 141 GB · 4,890 GB/s · Q8_0 296 tok/s
- 07 H200 SXM 141 GB 141 GB · 4,890 GB/s · Q8_0 296 tok/s
- 08 Radeon Instinct MI325X 256 GB · 6,000 GB/s · Q8_0 283 tok/s
- 09 Radeon Instinct MI300A 128 GB · 5,325 GB/s · Q8_0 251 tok/s
- 10 Radeon Instinct MI300X 192 GB · 5,325 GB/s · Q8_0 251 tok/s
The smallest GPUs that still run InternLM-XComposer
The cheapest route in, by memory capacity. A tight fit runs the model but leaves nothing spare for a longer conversation.
- 01 Quadro P2200 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 27.8 tok/s
- 02 P102-100 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 61.1 tok/s
- 03 GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 22.2 tok/s
- 04 Quadro P2000 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 19.5 tok/s
- 05 Tesla K20s 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 28.9 tok/s
- 06 Tesla K20m 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 28.9 tok/s
- 07 Tesla K20c 5 GB · needs 4.1 GB · Q3_K_M · tight 28.9 tok/s
- 08 RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation 6 GB · needs 4.9 GB · Q4_K_M · tight 26.8 tok/s
- 09 GeForce RTX 3050 6 GB 6 GB · needs 4.9 GB · Q4_K_M · tight 23.5 tok/s
- 10 Arc A380M 6 GB · needs 4.9 GB · Q4_K_M · tight 16.9 tok/s
What the numbers mean
What you need to run it
Minimum card
Tesla K20c
Memory needed
4.1 GB
Fastest
484 tok/s
InternLM-XComposer reaches a parameter count of 7B. That is small enough that hardware is rarely the obstacle, including on cards several years old. The number of cards we track that can run it: 589.
The least hardware that works is Tesla K20c, with a memory capacity of 5 GB, running it at a compression of Q3_K_M and producing around 28.9 tokens per second.
At the other end sits B200, generating roughly 484 tokens per second on the strength of a memory bandwidth of 8,000 GB/s.
What this model is
InternLM-XComposer was published by Shanghai AI Lab, in the country recorded as China, during September 2023. The publishing organisation is categorised as academia.
It works in the domain of Multimodal, Language, Vision, and is recorded as performing the task of chat, Visual question answering, Translation.
Rather than being trained from scratch, it is derived from InternLM. That is why it shares the base model's general shape and size.
Because its weights were released, nothing about running it depends on a provider staying available — it is yours once downloaded.
What decides the speed
Across every card that can run it, the middle of the range sits at 26.1 tokens per second. Exceeding reading speed outright: 559 of them.
Every weight participates in every token here, so bandwidth is the whole story: the ranking below is effectively a ranking of memory throughput.
Without the attention layout on record, the memory column is an approximation. It is close enough to choose hardware by, and least reliable at long context.
What went into building it
The training run consumed about 5.3 × 10²¹ FLOP, on hardware recorded as NVIDIA A100. That figure measures what producing the model cost, and has no bearing on how fast it answers.
It was trained on a corpus of about 125,604,608,000 tokens of text.
Step by step
How to choose a GPU for InternLM-XComposer
The table above has already assessed every card we hold specifications for against this model. Getting to your answer takes six steps.
-
01
Start from the memory column
The table lists every card able to hold InternLM-XComposer, needing around 4.1 GB at a compression of Q3_K_M. That figure, not the headline performance of a card, is what decides whether it runs.
-
02
Set the context length you will work at
The conversation occupies memory too, and grows as it goes. Set the slider to the length you expect, because at long context a card that handles short questions easily can be dropped by InternLM-XComposer.
-
03
Choose how far you will compress it
The quantisation column varies by card, because a bigger card holds a more accurate copy, reaching a compression of Q3_K_M on the smallest card that fits. Setting a minimum quality drops the cards that only manage it by squeezing further than you would want, and holds the comparison at one level.
-
04
Rank by throughput rather than spec sheet
The speed ordering is effectively an ordering by memory bandwidth, for InternLM-XComposer. It will not match a gaming ordering, because generation is bound by memory bandwidth. The card topping the list is B200, at 484 tok/s.
-
05
Look at the headroom, not just the fit
A tight fit runs, but leaves nothing spare for a longer conversation, in the case of InternLM-XComposer. Comfortable means you can grow the context later. That difference matters more than a few tokens per second, so buy for comfortable if you expect to.
-
06
Check the card from the other side
Each card page repeats this sweep for every model we hold, answering what else the hardware is good for beyond InternLM-XComposer.
Answers
InternLM-XComposer — common questions
InternLM-XComposer— how many parameters does it have?
It has a parameter count of 7B. 7B from https://huggingface.co/internlm/internlm-xcomposer-vl-7b. That figure is the total, and it is what decides how much memory the model needs — roughly half a gigabyte per billion at the compression most people use.
InternLM-XComposer— who created it?
It was published by Shanghai AI Lab, based in China, an organisation categorised as academia.
InternLM-XComposer— when was it released?
It was published in September 2023. Capability per parameter has improved considerably since, so a newer model of the same size is often the better use of the same hardware.
InternLM-XComposer— what is it used for?
It works in the domain of Multimodal, Language, Vision, and is recorded as handling the task of chat, Visual question answering, Translation. These are the areas it was designed around; they describe intent rather than a hard boundary.
InternLM-XComposer— where can I download it?
The weights are published, though we do not hold a repository link for it. This site calculates hardware requirements rather than hosting model files.
InternLM-XComposer— how much compute was used to train it?
Training consumed around 5.3 × 10²¹ FLOP, on hardware recorded as NVIDIA A100. That measures what producing the model cost and says nothing about how quickly it answers once trained — inference speed comes from memory bandwidth, not from the training budget.
InternLM-XComposer— can I run it if it does not fit in my GPU?
Only by offloading, which is usually a false economy: the part held in system memory drags the whole thing down. The nearest miss we calculate falls short by 1.3 GB. Every figure here assumes the whole model is resident on the card.
InternLM-XComposer— would two GPUs run it faster?
A second card roughly doubles the memory available but not the generation rate. The number already able to run it alone: 589. So a second card is rarely the answer here.
InternLM-XComposer— why does the quantisation differ between cards?
Because capacity varies, so does how hard it has to be squeezed. The number of distinct levels in the table above: 4. Bigger cards get the more accurate version, and the quality floor above pins the comparison to one level.
InternLM-XComposer— how accurate are these speed estimates?
Every figure is derived from memory bandwidth and model size, not benchmarked, which is why each is published as a range rather than a single number. One example: 290–774 tok/s on B200. The same model and card vary by thirty to fifty per cent depending on the inference software and its version.
InternLM-XComposer— what GPU do I need to run it?
The smallest card in our catalogue that holds it is Tesla K20c, with a memory capacity of 5 GB. It runs the model at a compression of Q3_K_M using about 4.1 GB, and produces roughly 28.9 tokens per second. The number of cards able to run it in total: 589.
InternLM-XComposer— how fast is it on a GPU?
It depends on the card. The quickest we calculate is B200, at about 484 tokens per second; the slowest that still runs it manages considerably less. Reading speed is around ten tokens per second, and the number of cards clearing that: 559.
InternLM-XComposer— how much VRAM does it need?
It needs about 4.1 GB at a compression of Q3_K_M, which is what the smallest card that runs it uses. Less compression needs more: the figures in the memory column above are recalculated for each card, because each one holds the least-compressed version it can.
InternLM-XComposer— can I run it on a GPU holding 8 GB?
Yes. The card CMP 170HX 8 GB, holding 8 GB, runs it at a compression of Q6_K, using about 6.6 GB and generating roughly 131 tokens per second. The fit is tight.
InternLM-XComposer— can I run it on a GPU holding 12 GB?
Yes. The card GeForce RTX 3080 Ti, holding 12 GB, runs it at a compression of Q8_0, using about 8.2 GB and generating roughly 55.2 tokens per second. The fit is comfortable.
InternLM-XComposer— can I run it on a GPU holding 16 GB?
Yes. The card Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, holding 16 GB, runs it at a compression of Q8_0, using about 8.2 GB and generating roughly 68.4 tokens per second. The fit is comfortable.
InternLM-XComposer— can I run it on a GPU holding 24 GB?
Yes. The card GeForce RTX 5090 D V2, holding 24 GB, runs it at a compression of Q8_0, using about 8.2 GB and generating roughly 81.1 tokens per second. The fit is comfortable.
InternLM-XComposer— is it open source?
Its weights are published, so it can be downloaded and run on your own hardware. Note that open weights is not the same as open source in the full sense — it says nothing about the training data, the training code, or the commercial terms attached.
The other direction
Looking at it from the other side?
This page starts from the model. If you already own a card and want to know everything it will run, start from the hardware instead.