Where Is VLA Inference Time Spent? Bottlenecks and Optimization Interactions Across GPUs
Overview
This paper presents a comprehensive measurement study of seven families of inference optimization methods—including CUDA graphs, compilation, token pruning, and quantization—evaluated on seven state-of-the-art Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models across four GPU families ranging from datacenter H100 to embedded Jetson Thor. The authors analyze how CPU launch overhead, memory bandwidth, and kernel efficiency jointly influence optimization gains and how applying one method affects the benefit of another. Based on this analysis, they derive VLA-Triage, a set of guidelines for stacking optimizations under latency budgets, identifying which stages can provide required savings and which combinations require testing in deployed execution modes.
Generated from attributed reports · Updated 3 days ago
Event evidence and corrections
0 attributed source owners. Ownership does not establish independent confirmation. Quantities are reported separately and are never added together.
No current evidence-backed claims. Missing information remains not reported.
Report timeline
Follow attributed reports and material updates.
- arXiv Robotics — research abstractsSignalWhere Is VLA Inference Time Spent? Bottlenecks and Optimization Interactions Across GPUs
This paper presents a comprehensive measurement study of seven families of inference optimization methods—including CUDA graphs, compilation, token pruning, and quantization—evaluated on seven state-of-the-art Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models across four GPU families ranging from datacenter H100 to embedded Jetson Thor. The authors analyze how CPU launch overhead, memory bandwidth, and kernel efficiency jointly influence optimization gains and how applying one method affects the benefit of another. Based on this analysis, they derive VLA-Triage, a set of guidelines for stacking optimizations under latency budgets, identifying which stages can provide required savings and which combinations require testing in deployed execution modes.
Event coverage history
Current attention 3·Peak within the comparable range 3(2026-11-07 00:00 UTC)·Change within the comparable range over 24 hours –
The trend compares participants observed continuously; its scope may be narrower than current attention totals. Hover or click to explore hourly observations, or use the left and right arrow keys.
Timezone · UTC
Article dates follow your selected timezone. Briefing editions use Hong Kong time (UTC+8).