Skip to content

Compare

Everyone else trades output for power. That trade is the thing worth removing.

There are only a handful of ways to get more compute out of a fixed power envelope. Four of them cost you throughput, capital or downtime.

Side by side

The same envelope, five different bills.

Five ways to run a data centre inside the power it already has. Read the last two columns first: they are where the difference lives.

Time to more usable compute

A new grid connection

Years

New switchgear and distribution

Quarters

More accelerators

Lead time, then no help

ADAPT, one software install

Hours

Illustrative, not to scale

  • Static power capping

    What it does
    One ceiling for every workload, set after the fact.
    Effect on output
    Throughput falls when the cap binds
    Reversible
    Yes

  • Scheduler throttling

    What it does
    Defer or slow work to stay inside the envelope.
    Effect on output
    Queues lengthen, latency slips
    Reversible
    Yes

  • DVFS, the built-in control

    What it does
    Steps between fixed voltage and frequency points after the draw has already changed.
    Effect on output
    Coarse reactive steps leave headroom unused or clip work
    Reversible
    Yes, it is the factory default

  • Undervolting and clock limits

    What it does
    Hold the part below its rated operating point.
    Effect on output
    Slower, and vendor support gets complicated
    Reversible
    Yes

  • Liquid cooling retrofit

    What it does
    Remove heat better so density can rise.
    Effect on output
    Unchanged, but capital works and downtime
    Reversible
    No

  • ADAPT, one software install

    What it does
    Read the workload signature and shape the draw ahead of the excursion.
    Effect on output
    No throughput change in the measured run
    Reversible
    Yes, removal restores driver defaults

Measured on production NVIDIA H100 NVL under an equal power cap on managed and baseline arms. Your fleet baseline confirms the figure for your site.

Why the difference

Reactive control acts after the excursion. Predictive control acts before it.

A cap can only respond to power it has already seen, so it clips real work. Reading the workload signature first means the draw is shaped ahead of the peak instead of trimmed after it.

Up to 21%Less GPU die power, measuredObserved under an equal cap on both arms.
0%Throughput change in the measured runSame work completed, less energy drawn.
HoursTime to deploySoftware install, removable, no capital works.

The question everyone asks

How is this different from DVFS?

Dynamic voltage and frequency scaling is the control already inside every accelerator. It is a fair challenge, and the difference is fundamental.

DVFS reacts

DVFS watches the draw that has already happened and steps to the nearest point on a fixed table. It is always one excursion behind the workload.

ADAPT predicts

Our method reads the workload signature and shapes the current ahead of the excursion, so the peak never fully forms. Prediction, not reaction.

Steps versus shaping

A fixed table of operating points versus continuous modulation of the draw. One picks from a menu; the other writes the curve.

ADAPT runs alongside the stock driver and firmware. It does not replace DVFS; it removes the conditions that force DVFS to make expensive choices. Removal restores driver defaults.

Next

Run it against your own numbers, then against your own racks.

Calculate your headroomRead the hard questionsSee the baseline method