ESM2-3B 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 C1080
4 GB · Q6_K · 17.9 tok/s
Fastest card
B200
1,129 tok/s · 180 GB
Which GPUs can run ESM2-3B?
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.
818 cards match
Calculating| Needs | Quantisation | Fit | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1,129
tok/s
678–1,807 · low confidence |
B200 NVIDIA | 180 GB | 8,000 GB/s | Jan 2024 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
1,129
tok/s
678–1,807 · low confidence |
B300 NVIDIA | 288 GB | 8,000 GB/s | Sep 2025 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
902
tok/s
541–1,443 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI350X AMD | 288 GB | 8,190 GB/s | Jan 2025 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
902
tok/s
541–1,443 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI355X AMD | 288 GB | 8,190 GB/s | Jan 2025 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
721
tok/s
433–1,154 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI300 AMD | 128 GB | 6,550 GB/s | Jan 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
690
tok/s
414–1,105 · low confidence |
H200 NVL NVIDIA | 141 GB | 4,890 GB/s | Nov 2024 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
690
tok/s
414–1,105 · low confidence |
H200 SXM 141 GB NVIDIA | 141 GB | 4,890 GB/s | Nov 2024 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
661
tok/s
396–1,057 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI325X AMD | 256 GB | 6,000 GB/s | Oct 2024 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
586
tok/s
352–938 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI300A AMD | 128 GB | 5,325 GB/s | Dec 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
586
tok/s
352–938 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI300X AMD | 192 GB | 5,325 GB/s | Dec 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
586
tok/s
352–938 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI308X AMD | 192 GB | 5,325 GB/s | Dec 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
556
tok/s
334–890 · low confidence |
H100 NVL 94 GB NVIDIA | 94 GB | 3,940 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
474
tok/s
285–759 · low confidence |
H100 PCIe 96 GB NVIDIA | 96 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
474
tok/s
285–759 · low confidence |
H100 SXM5 80 GB NVIDIA | 80 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Oct 2022 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
474
tok/s
285–759 · low confidence |
H100 SXM5 94 GB NVIDIA | 94 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
474
tok/s
285–759 · low confidence |
H100 SXM5 96 GB NVIDIA | 96 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
474
tok/s
285–759 · low confidence |
H800 SXM5 NVIDIA | 80 GB | 3,360 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
361
tok/s
217–578 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI250 AMD | 128 GB | 3,280 GB/s | Nov 2021 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
361
tok/s
217–578 · low confidence |
Radeon Instinct MI250X AMD | 128 GB | 3,280 GB/s | Nov 2021 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
301
tok/s
181–482 · low confidence |
Data Center GPU Max 1550 Intel | 128 GB | 3,280 GB/s | Jan 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
295
tok/s
177–471 · low confidence |
Data Center GPU Max Subsystem Intel | 128 GB | 3,210 GB/s | Jan 2023 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
288
tok/s
173–461 · low confidence |
A100 SXM4 80 GB NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Nov 2020 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
288
tok/s
173–461 · low confidence |
A100X NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Jun 2021 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
288
tok/s
173–461 · low confidence |
A800 SXM4 80 GB NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Aug 2022 | 3.9 GB | Q8_0 | Comfortable |
|
288
tok/s
173–461 · low confidence |
H100 CNX NVIDIA | 80 GB | 2,040 GB/s | Mar 2023 | 3.9 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
- Meta AI,New York University (NYU),Stanford University,Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
- Organisation type
- Industry,Academia,Academia,Academia
- Country
- United States of America
- Published
- 21 July 2022
- Authors
- Zeming Lin, Halil Akin, Roshan Rao, Brian Hie, Zhongkai Zhu, Wenting Lu, Nikita Smetanin, Robert Verkuil, Ori Kabeli, Yaniv Shmueli, Allan dos Santos Costa, Maryam Fazel-Zarandi, Tom Sercu, Salvatore Candido, Alexander Rives
What it does
The problem areas the model was built for. A model can carry several of each.
- Domain
- Biology
- Task
- Proteins, Protein or nucleotide language model (pLM/nLM), Protein folding prediction
- Approach
- Unsupervised
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
- 3B
- Training data
- 15,360,000,000 tokens
- Epochs
- 83.3
In the name
Section A.1.1: "This allowed ESM-2 models to train on over 60M protein sequences." Average protein sequence is 200 tokens, per https://epoch.ai/blog/biological-sequence-models-in-the-context-of-the-ai-directives#fn:4 60M * 200 = 12B tokens Epochs: Used 500k steps at 2M token batch size 500k * 2M / 12B = 83.3
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
- 3 × 10²² FLOP
- How it was established
- Hardware,Third-party estimation
from xTrimoPGLM paper Table 9 (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2023.07.05.547496v1): 1.8e22 FLOP from the paper's Supplementary Materials: "We trained each model over 512 NVIDIA V100 GPUs. ESM2 700M took 8 days to train. The 3B parameter LM took 30 days. The 15B model took 60 days." 30 days x 512 V100s x an imputed 30% utilization": 5e22 FLOP Geometric mean: 3e22
The training run
What it physically took to train: which chips, how many, for how long, and what that drew from the wall.
- Wall-clock time
- 720 hours (30 days)
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 (unrestricted)
- Training code
- Unreleased
MIT weights, CC BY 4.0 data https://github.com/facebookresearch/esm?tab=readme-ov-file#available-esmssd
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
- 636
Sources
Where this record came from and when it was last checked.
- Reference
- Evolutionary-scale prediction of atomic-level protein structure with a language model
- Last updated
- 28 November 2025
The extremes
The ten fastest GPUs that run ESM2-3B
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 1,129 tok/s
- 02 B200 180 GB · 8,000 GB/s · Q8_0 1,129 tok/s
- 03 Radeon Instinct MI350X 288 GB · 8,190 GB/s · Q8_0 902 tok/s
- 04 Radeon Instinct MI355X 288 GB · 8,190 GB/s · Q8_0 902 tok/s
- 05 Radeon Instinct MI300 128 GB · 6,550 GB/s · Q8_0 721 tok/s
- 06 H200 NVL 141 GB · 4,890 GB/s · Q8_0 690 tok/s
- 07 H200 SXM 141 GB 141 GB · 4,890 GB/s · Q8_0 690 tok/s
- 08 Radeon Instinct MI325X 256 GB · 6,000 GB/s · Q8_0 661 tok/s
- 09 Radeon Instinct MI300A 128 GB · 5,325 GB/s · Q8_0 586 tok/s
- 10 Radeon Instinct MI300X 192 GB · 5,325 GB/s · Q8_0 586 tok/s
The smallest GPUs that still run ESM2-3B
The cheapest route in, by memory capacity. A tight fit runs the model but leaves nothing spare for a longer conversation.
- 01 GeForce RTX 4010 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 19.7 tok/s
- 02 RTX A400 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 19.7 tok/s
- 03 RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 26.3 tok/s
- 04 GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 39.4 tok/s
- 05 Jetson Orin Nano 4 GB 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 7.0 tok/s
- 06 Radeon RX 6450M 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 20.5 tok/s
- 07 Radeon RX 6550M 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 23.0 tok/s
- 08 Radeon RX 6550S 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 20.5 tok/s
- 09 Arc A310 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 16.5 tok/s
- 10 Arc Pro A30M 4 GB · needs 3.2 GB · Q6_K · tight 17.1 tok/s
What the numbers mean
What you need to run it
Minimum card
Tesla C1080
Memory needed
3.2 GB
Fastest
1,129 tok/s
ESM2-3B is small enough at 3B parameters that hardware is rarely the obstacle — 818 of the cards we track can run it, including cards several years old.
The least hardware that works is a Tesla C1080. Its 4 GB is enough at Q6_K compression, giving roughly 17.9 tokens per second.
A B200 is the fastest we calculate for it: about 1,129 tokens per second, from 8,000 GB/s of memory bandwidth.
Where it came from
ESM2-3B was published by Meta AI,New York University (NYU),Stanford University,Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), in United States of America, in July 2022. industry,Academia,Academia,Academia is the category the publisher falls under.
It works in Biology, and is recorded as doing proteins, Protein or nucleotide language model (pLM/nLM), Protein folding prediction.
Published weights mean the model runs on your machine rather than someone else's, which is what makes the hardware question below answerable at all.
Understanding the speeds
Half the cards that hold it manage more than 35.8 tokens per second, and 780 exceed reading speed outright.
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
Training it took roughly 3 × 10²² FLOP of computation — a measure of what producing the model cost, not of how fast it answers.
Around 15,360,000,000 tokens went into training it.
Step by step
How to choose a GPU for ESM2-3B
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
Every card here has been checked against ESM2-3B — around 3.2 GB at Q6_K. Capacity is the gate — a card either holds it or it does not.
-
02
Match the context to your actual use
Longer conversations cost memory on top of what the weights need. Move the slider to your real working length before trusting any row for ESM2-3B.
-
03
Choose how far you will compress it
Compression is what makes ESM2-3B fit smaller cards, at some cost in accuracy — Q6_K on the smallest card that fits. A minimum quality removes the ones that go too far.
-
04
Compare tokens per second, not specifications
Sort by speed to see how cards rank for ESM2-3B. It will not match a gaming ordering — generation is bound by memory bandwidth, which is why the B200 tops it at 1,129 tok/s.
-
05
Read the fit column last
Tight means ESM2-3B loads and works, with no room to raise the context later. Comfortable means you can. The difference matters more than a few tokens per second.
-
06
Open the card you have settled on
Following a card through to its own page shows every other model it can hold, which is the question that follows once ESM2-3B is settled.
Answers
ESM2-3B — common questions
Who created ESM2-3B?
ESM2-3B was published by Meta AI,New York University (NYU),Stanford University,Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), based in United States of America, categorised as industry,Academia,Academia,Academia.
When was ESM2-3B released?
ESM2-3B was published in July 2022. Capability per parameter has improved considerably since, so a newer model of the same size is often the better use of the same hardware.
What is ESM2-3B used for?
ESM2-3B works in Biology, and is recorded as handling proteins, Protein or nucleotide language model (pLM/nLM), Protein folding prediction. Models frequently carry more than one of each, and the tags describe purpose rather than capability limits.
Where can I download ESM2-3B?
The weights for ESM2-3B are published, though we do not hold a repository link for it. This site calculates hardware requirements rather than hosting model files.
How much compute was used to train ESM2-3B?
Around 3 × 10²² FLOP. 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.
Can I run ESM2-3B if it does not fit in my GPU?
Only by offloading, which is usually a false economy: the part in system memory drags the whole thing down. Our figures for ESM2-3B assume it is fully resident.
Would two GPUs run ESM2-3B faster?
A second card roughly doubles the memory available but not the generation rate. With 818 cards already able to run ESM2-3B alone, the case for pairing is weak.
Why does the quantisation differ between cards for ESM2-3B?
Each card is shown running the least-compressed copy it can hold, and ESM2-3B appears at 2 different compression levels across the cards that fit it. Bigger cards get the more accurate version.
How accurate are these ESM2-3B speed estimates?
Every figure is derived from memory bandwidth and model size, not benchmarked. That is why each is published as a range such as 678–1,807 tok/s on the B200 rather than a single number.
What GPU do I need to run ESM2-3B?
The smallest card in our catalogue that holds ESM2-3B is the Tesla C1080, with 4 GB of memory. It runs the model at Q6_K using about 3.2 GB, and produces roughly 17.9 tokens per second. 818 cards in total can run it.
How fast is ESM2-3B on a GPU?
It depends on the card. The quickest we calculate is a B200 at about 1,129 tokens per second; the slowest that still runs it manages considerably less. Reading speed is around ten tokens per second, and 780 of the cards that can run ESM2-3B clear that.
How much VRAM does ESM2-3B need?
About 3.2 GB at Q6_K compression, 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.
Can I run ESM2-3B on a 8 GB GPU?
Yes. A CMP 170HX 8 GB with 8 GB runs it at Q8_0, using about 3.9 GB and generating roughly 210 tokens per second — a comfortable fit.
Can I run ESM2-3B on a 12 GB GPU?
Yes. A GeForce RTX 3080 Ti with 12 GB runs it at Q8_0, using about 3.9 GB and generating roughly 129 tokens per second — a comfortable fit.
Can I run ESM2-3B on a 16 GB GPU?
Yes. A Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB with 16 GB runs it at Q8_0, using about 3.9 GB and generating roughly 160 tokens per second — a comfortable fit.
Can I run ESM2-3B on a 24 GB GPU?
Yes. A GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 with 24 GB runs it at Q8_0, using about 3.9 GB and generating roughly 189 tokens per second — a comfortable fit.
Is ESM2-3B open source?
Its weights are published, so ESM2-3B 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.
How many parameters does ESM2-3B have?
ESM2-3B has 3B parameters. In the name. 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.
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.