Power Stabilization for AI Training Datacenters
August 20, 2025 ยท Declared Dead ยท ๐ arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Esha Choukse, Brijesh Warrier, Scot Heath, Luz Belmont, April Zhao, Hassan Ali Khan, Brian Harry, Matthew Kappel, Russell J. Hewett, Kushal Datta, Yu Pei, Caroline Lichtenberger, John Siegler, David Lukofsky, Zaid Kahn, Gurpreet Sahota, Andy Sullivan, Charles Frederick, Hien Thai, Rebecca Naughton, Daniel Jurnove, Justin Harp, Reid Carper, Nithish Mahalingam, Srini Varkala, Alok Gautam Kumbhare, Satyajit Desai, Venkatesh Ramamurthy, Praneeth Gottumukkala, Girish Bhatia, Kelsey Wildstone, Laurentiu Olariu, Ileana Incorvaia, Alex Wetmore, Prabhat Ram, Melur Raghuraman, Mohammed Ayna, Mike Kendrick, Ricardo Bianchini, Aaron Hurst, Reza Zamani, Xin Li, Michael Petrov, Gene Oden, Rory Carmichael, Tom Li, Apoorv Gupta, Pratikkumar Patel, Nilesh Dattani, Lawrence Marwong, Rob Nertney, Hirofumi Kobayashi, Jeff Liott, Miro Enev, Divya Ramakrishnan, Ian Buck, Jonah Alben
arXiv ID
2508.14318
Category
cs.AR: Hardware Architecture
Cross-listed
cs.AI,
cs.DC
Citations
6
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
2 months ago
Abstract
Large Artificial Intelligence (AI) training workloads spanning several tens of thousands of GPUs present unique power management challenges. These arise due to the high variability in power consumption during the training. Given the synchronous nature of these jobs, during every iteration there is a computation-heavy phase, where each GPU works on the local data, and a communication-heavy phase where all the GPUs synchronize on the data. Because compute-heavy phases require much more power than communication phases, large power swings occur. The amplitude of these power swings is ever increasing with the increase in the size of training jobs. An even bigger challenge arises from the frequency spectrum of these power swings which, if harmonized with critical frequencies of utilities, can cause physical damage to the power grid infrastructure. Therefore, to continue scaling AI training workloads safely, we need to stabilize the power of such workloads. This paper introduces the challenge with production data and explores innovative solutions across the stack: software, GPU hardware, and datacenter infrastructure. We present the pros and cons of each of these approaches and finally present a multi-pronged approach to solving the challenge. The proposed solutions are rigorously tested using a combination of real hardware and Microsoft's in-house cloud power simulator, providing critical insights into the efficacy of these interventions under real-world conditions.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
๐ Similar Papers
In the same crypt โ Hardware Architecture
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Corona: System Implications of Emerging Nanophotonic Technology
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
A scalable multi-core architecture with heterogeneous memory structures for Dynamic Neuromorphic Asynchronous Processors (DYNAPs)
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
SpAtten: Efficient Sparse Attention Architecture with Cascade Token and Head Pruning
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Splitwise: Efficient generative LLM inference using phase splitting
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Neural Cache: Bit-Serial In-Cache Acceleration of Deep Neural Networks
Died the same way โ ๐ป Ghosted
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
๐ป
Ghosted