Adding columns to understand Model Performance #24

Open
opened 2024-01-30 06:36:36 -05:00 by trivikramak · 5 comments
trivikramak commented 2024-01-30 06:36:36 -05:00 (Migrated from github.com)

Can we add some metrics or a relative scoring mechanism or something like that to understand how good the models are?

Can we add some metrics or a relative scoring mechanism or something like that to understand how good the models are?
Vaibhavs10 commented 2024-01-30 06:53:17 -05:00 (Migrated from github.com)
@Pendrokar is doing that here: https://github.com/Vaibhavs10/open-tts-tracker/pull/19
Pendrokar commented 2024-01-30 12:48:26 -05:00 (Migrated from github.com)

With "Real-time factor below threshold" being that relative scoring for CPU. For GPU acceleration it would be too hard to tell. Best to just visit the Repo of the specific TTS or test the 🤗 Space and see if they provide the data.

With "Real-time factor below threshold" being that relative scoring for CPU. For GPU acceleration it would be too hard to tell. Best to just visit the Repo of the specific TTS or test the 🤗 Space and see if they provide the data.
Pendrokar commented 2024-03-11 07:30:20 -04:00 (Migrated from github.com)

@trivikramak The pull request for adding the capability table has been accepted. Feel free to correct information within it with a PR. I judged the capability from HF Spaces. If a processor column is empty, then that means the RTF was quick with CUDA, but I could not determine if it would have been as fast with just the CPU.
https://github.com/Vaibhavs10/open-tts-tracker/blob/main/README.md#capability-specifics

@trivikramak The pull request for adding the capability table has been accepted. Feel free to correct information within it with a PR. I judged the capability from HF Spaces. If a processor column is empty, then that means the RTF was quick with CUDA, but I could not determine if it would have been as fast with just the CPU. https://github.com/Vaibhavs10/open-tts-tracker/blob/main/README.md#capability-specifics
Pendrokar commented 2024-03-16 19:11:07 -04:00 (Migrated from github.com)

@fakerybakery I noticed you've added CPU as processor for StyleTTS under the capabilities table, but when I cloned the space of it on HF, I got a RTF of around 7.0. 🤔 Now I did choose "RTF below 2.0" condition arbitrarily as any TTS is capable of processing the audio with CPU. Just the question arises if there is a point to including those whose RTF is 5, 10, 20 with CPU. If so, all cells would have CPU as the processor... @Vaibhavs10 thoughts?

I see an RTF of 2.0 as a good target as a TTS with streaming support would be able to playback the audio once it gets passed half-way of processing the audio.

@fakerybakery I noticed you've added CPU as processor for StyleTTS under the capabilities table, but when I cloned the space of it on HF, I got a RTF of around 7.0. 🤔 Now I did choose "RTF below 2.0" condition arbitrarily as any TTS is capable of processing the audio with CPU. Just the question arises if there is a point to including those whose RTF is 5, 10, 20 with CPU. If so, all cells would have CPU as the processor... @Vaibhavs10 thoughts? I see an RTF of 2.0 as a good target as a TTS with streaming support would be able to playback the audio once it gets passed half-way of processing the audio.
fakerybakery commented 2024-03-16 19:53:39 -04:00 (Migrated from github.com)

@Pendrokar I think it also depends on which CPU your using. On a MacBook I get much higher speeds, free HF Spaces have a quite basic CPU

@Pendrokar I think it also depends on which CPU your using. On a MacBook I get much higher speeds, free HF Spaces have a quite basic CPU
Sign in to join this conversation.
No labels
No milestone
No project
No assignees
1 participant
Notifications
Due date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format "yyyy-mm-dd".

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference
Vaibhavs10/open-tts-tracker#24
No description provided.