For the complete documentation index, see llms.txt. This page is also available as Markdown.

Workflows benchmarks

Latency of direct model inference compared with the same model wrapped in a Workflow.

This page compares direct model inference latency versus Workflow-wrapped inference latency for popular detection models. The goal is to quantify the overhead introduced by the Workflows execution engine.

Self-Hosted Results

All times are in milliseconds. Benchmarks were run on a server-grade NVIDIA GPU using TensorRT-optimized models, called directly via the inference Python package. Each model was warmed up before timing, then measured over 10 iterations.

Model
Avg Direct (ms)
Avg Workflow (ms)
Workflow Overhead (ms)

rfdetr-nano

2.65

4.40

1.75

rfdetr-small

3.17

4.62

1.45

rfdetr-medium

3.79

5.38

1.59

rfdetr-large

4.87

7.46

2.59

rfdetr-xlarge

8.44

10.65

2.21

yolo26n-640

2.42

4.07

1.65

yolo26s-640

3.25

5.48

2.23

yolo26m-640

4.56

6.29

1.73

yolo26l-640

5.76

8.01

2.25

yolo26x-640

7.75

9.36

1.61

Key Takeaways

  • Workflow overhead is minimal - typically 1.5-2.6 ms on top of direct inference, regardless of model size.

  • For larger models (e.g. rfdetr-xlarge), the workflow overhead is small relative to model inference time (~26%).

  • For smaller, faster models (e.g. yolo26n-640), the overhead is proportionally larger but still under 2 ms in absolute terms.

  • Workflow overhead is CPU-bound (graph scheduling, input preparation, output routing), while model inference itself typically runs on the GPU (when available). As a result, the overhead stays relatively constant regardless of GPU speed.

Methodology

  • GPU-accelerated inference (results will vary by hardware).

  • Warmup: Each model and workflow engine is warmed up with one inference call before timing begins.

  • Iterations: 10 timed iterations per method, per model.

  • Direct inference: Uses get_model() and calls model.infer() directly.

  • Workflow inference: Wraps the same model in a minimal single-step workflow and runs it through the Execution Engine.

Click to expand benchmark script

Cloud-Hosted Results

The following results were benchmarked on the hosted Serverless Cloud API. Some notes:

  • Compared to self-hosted results, Serverless server also needs to fetch the Workflow schema and model weights (whereas Serverless model inference only fetches weights)

  • There's a static 10-50ms latency overhead for Workflows

Serverless benchmark workflows

Last updated

Was this helpful?