vLLM Bench vs Evalscope Perf Load Testing Comparison#

Goal: To present a reproducible, comparable, and extensible load testing methodology, enabling evalscope perf and vllm bench serve to output consistent request metrics and statistics for the same vLLM model service.

Conclusion:

  • With identical request parameters and concurrency configurations, evalscope perf achieves consistent metrics (TTFT, TPOT, ITL, throughput, etc.) with vllm bench serve.

  • This guide provides parameter mappings and validation steps to help you quickly reproduce and extend tests.

TL;DR: Quick Comparison Recipe#

  1. Start vLLM OpenAI Chat Service

VLLM_USE_MODELSCOPE=True CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES=0 \
python -m vllm.entrypoints.openai.api_server \
  --model Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --gpu-memory-utilization 0.5 \
  --served-model-name Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --trust-remote-code \
  --port 8801 \
  --no-enable-prefix-caching

  1. Load Test with vLLM Bench (Random Input)

vllm bench serve \
  --max-concurrency 50 \
  --num-prompts 1000 \
  --host 127.0.0.1 \
  --port 8801 \
  --backend openai-chat \
  --model Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --dataset-name random \
  --random-input-len 100 \
  --random-output-len 100 \
  --tokenizer /root/.cache/modelscope/hub/models/Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --endpoint /v1/chat/completions \
  --ignore-eos

  1. Load Test with Evalscope Perf (Random Input)

evalscope perf \
  --parallel 50 \
  --number 1000 \
  --log-every-n-query 1000 \
  --model Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --url http://127.0.0.1:8801/v1/chat/completions \
  --api openai \
  --dataset random \
  --max-tokens 100 \
  --prefix-length 0 \
  --min-prompt-length 100 \
  --max-prompt-length 100 \
  --tokenizer-path Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --extra-args '{"ignore_eos": true}'

Environment and Prerequisites#

  • Hardware: A100 80GB GPU

  • Versions:

    • vLLM: v0.17.0

    • evalscope: v1.5.0

Notes:

  • When using ModelScope weights, set VLLM_USE_MODELSCOPE=True and provide the corresponding tokenizer path.

  • Ensure the endpoint uses OpenAI Chat /v1/chat/completions to maintain consistent request structures.

Unified Server Configuration#

Using the OpenAI Chat endpoint (recommended):

VLLM_USE_MODELSCOPE=True CUDA_VISIBLE_DEVICES=0 \
python -m vllm.entrypoints.openai.api_server \
  --model Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --gpu-memory-utilization 0.5 \
  --served-model-name Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --trust-remote-code \
  --port 8801 \
  --no-enable-prefix-caching

Tips:

  • Set --gpu-memory-utilization conservatively to prevent OOM issues.

  • If customizing --served-model-name, ensure the corresponding --model value matches on the benchmarking tools.

  • Use --no-enable-prefix-caching to avoid caching effects on load test results.

Parameter Alignment Guide (Key Mappings)#

To maintain an apples-to-apples comparison, align the following parameters:

  • Concurrency and Requests

    • vLLM: --max-concurrency ↔ Evalscope: --parallel

    • vLLM: --num-prompts ↔ Evalscope: --number

  • Endpoint and Protocol

    • vLLM: --backend openai-chat / --endpoint /v1/chat/completions

    • Evalscope: --api openai + --url http://host:port/v1/chat/completions

  • Model Name

    • vLLM: --model ...

    • Evalscope: --model ... (used for populating model field in request body)

  • Data Generation (Random)

    • vLLM: --dataset-name random --random-input-len N --random-output-len M

    • Evalscope: --dataset random --min-prompt-length N --max-prompt-length N --max-tokens M --prefix-length 0

  • Tokenizer (Consistent Template)

    • vLLM: --tokenizer /path/to/tokenizer

    • Evalscope: --tokenizer-path <same-as-above-or-model-id>

  • Decoding Control

    • vLLM: --ignore-eos

    • Evalscope: --extra-args '{"ignore_eos": true}'

Consistency Validation: Minimum Example (1 Concurrent / 1 Request)#

vLLM:

vllm bench serve \
  --max-concurrency 1 \
  --num-prompts 1 \
  --host 127.0.0.1 \
  --port 8801 \
  --backend openai-chat \
  --model Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --dataset-name random \
  --random-input-len 100 \
  --random-output-len 100 \
  --tokenizer /root/.cache/modelscope/hub/models/Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --endpoint /v1/chat/completions \
  --ignore-eos

Sample Logs:

INFO ... Received request ... params: SamplingParams(n=1, presence_penalty=0.0, frequency_penalty=0.0, repetition_penalty=1.1, temperature=0.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=0, min_p=0.0, seed=None, stop=[], stop_token_ids=[], bad_words=[], include_stop_str_in_output=False, ignore_eos=True, max_tokens=100, min_tokens=0, logprobs=None, prompt_logprobs=None, skip_special_tokens=True, spaces_between_special_tokens=True, truncate_prompt_tokens=None, guided_decoding=None, extra_args=None), prompt_token_ids: None, prompt_embeds shape: None, lora_request: None, prompt_adapter_request: None.

Evalscope:

evalscope perf \
  --parallel 1 \
  --number 1 \
  --log-every-n-query 500 \
  --model Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --url http://127.0.0.1:8801/v1/chat/completions \
  --api openai \
  --dataset random \
  --max-tokens 100 \
  --prefix-length 0 \
  --min-prompt-length 100 \
  --max-prompt-length 100 \
  --tokenizer-path Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --extra-args '{"ignore_eos": true}'

Sample Logs:

INFO ... Received request ... params: SamplingParams(n=1, presence_penalty=0.0, frequency_penalty=0.0, repetition_penalty=1.1, temperature=0.0, top_p=1.0, top_k=0, min_p=0.0, seed=None, stop=[], stop_token_ids=[], bad_words=[], include_stop_str_in_output=False, ignore_eos=True, max_tokens=100, min_tokens=0, logprobs=None, prompt_logprobs=None, skip_special_tokens=True, spaces_between_special_tokens=True, truncate_prompt_tokens=None, guided_decoding=None, extra_args=None), prompt_token_ids: None, prompt_embeds shape: None, lora_request: None, prompt_adapter_request: None.

Comparison Results: Both tools produce consistent request parameters (metric methodologies for TTFT, TPOT, and ITL also align).

Full Load Test: 50 Concurrency / 1000 Requests#

vLLM:

vllm bench serve \
  --max-concurrency 50 \
  --num-prompts 1000 \
  --host 127.0.0.1 \
  --port 8801 \
  --backend openai-chat \
  --model Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --dataset-name random \
  --random-input-len 100 \
  --random-output-len 100 \
  --tokenizer /root/.cache/modelscope/hub/models/Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --endpoint /v1/chat/completions \
  --ignore-eos

Evalscope:

evalscope perf \
  --parallel 50 \
  --number 1000 \
  --log-every-n-query 1000 \
  --model Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --url http://127.0.0.1:8801/v1/chat/completions \
  --api openai \
  --dataset random \
  --max-tokens 100 \
  --prefix-length 0 \
  --min-prompt-length 100 \
  --max-prompt-length 100 \
  --tokenizer-path Qwen/Qwen2.5-0.5B-Instruct \
  --extra-args '{"ignore_eos": true}'

vLLM Output:

============ Serving Benchmark Result ============
Successful requests:                     1000      
Failed requests:                         0         
Maximum request concurrency:             50        
Benchmark duration (s):                  9.25      
Total input tokens:                      100000    
Total generated tokens:                  100000    
Request throughput (req/s):              108.08    
Output token throughput (tok/s):         10808.22  
Peak output token throughput (tok/s):    11399.00  
Peak concurrent requests:                176.00    
Total token throughput (tok/s):          21616.43  
---------------Time to First Token----------------
Mean TTFT (ms):                          73.18     
Median TTFT (ms):                        74.81     
P99 TTFT (ms):                           144.48    
-----Time per Output Token (excl. 1st token)------
Mean TPOT (ms):                          3.85      
Median TPOT (ms):                        3.85      
P99 TPOT (ms):                           4.14      
---------------Inter-token Latency----------------
Mean ITL (ms):                           3.86      
Median ITL (ms):                         3.63      
P99 ITL (ms):                            12.26     
==================================================

Evalscope Output:

Benchmarking summary:
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Key                               |      Value |
+===================================+============+
| Time taken for tests (s)          |     9.4961 |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Number of concurrency             |    50      |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Request rate (req/s)              |    -1      |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Total requests                    |  1000      |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Succeed requests                  |  1000      |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Failed requests                   |     0      |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Output token throughput (tok/s)   | 10530.7    |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Total token throughput (tok/s)    | 21061.2    |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Request throughput (req/s)        |   105.307  |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Average latency (s)               |     0.4663 |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Average time to first token (s)   |     0.1131 |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Average time per output token (s) |     0.0036 |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Average inter-token latency (s)   |     0.0037 |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Average input tokens per request  |    99.999  |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
| Average output tokens per request |   100      |
+-----------------------------------+------------+
Percentile results:
+-------------+----------+---------+----------+-------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+
| Percentiles | TTFT (s) | ITL (s) | TPOT (s) | Latency (s) | Input tokens | Output tokens | Output (tok/s) | Total (tok/s) |
+-------------+----------+---------+----------+-------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+
|     10%     |  0.0532  |   0.0   |  0.003   |   0.3699    |     100      |      100      |    167.0738    |   334.1475    |
|     25%     |  0.0802  | 0.0025  |  0.003   |   0.3836    |     100      |      100      |    190.1434    |   380.2868    |
|     50%     |  0.0949  | 0.0029  |  0.0032  |   0.4225    |     100      |      100      |    236.7219    |   473.4438    |
|     66%     |  0.1054  | 0.0031  |  0.0039  |   0.4846    |     100      |      100      |    253.8581    |   507.7162    |
|     75%     |  0.1136  | 0.0033  |  0.004   |    0.526    |     100      |      100      |    260.8281    |   521.6561    |
|     80%     |  0.1398  | 0.0036  |  0.0041  |   0.5509    |     100      |      100      |    264.4042    |   528.8084    |
|     90%     |  0.163   | 0.0052  |  0.0043  |   0.5985    |     100      |      100      |    270.4783    |   540.9567    |
|     95%     |  0.4063  | 0.0067  |  0.005   |    0.738    |     100      |      100      |    276.9653    |   553.9306    |
|     98%     |  0.4287  | 0.0108  |  0.0055  |   0.8134    |     100      |      100      |    287.3055    |   574.6111    |
|     99%     |  0.4302  | 0.0141  |  0.0059  |   0.8161    |     100      |      100      |    293.9073    |   587.8146    |
+-------------+----------+---------+----------+-------------+--------------+---------------+----------------+---------------+

Metric Definitions and Naming Correspondence#

To better understand the outputs from both tools, here’s a comparison of key metric definitions and the naming conventions used by vLLM and Evalscope:

  • Successful/Failed Requests

    • vLLM: Successful requests

    • Evalscope: Succeed requests / Failed requests

  • Request Throughput

    • vLLM: Request throughput (req/s)

    • Evalscope: Request throughput (req/s)

  • Token Throughput

    • vLLM: Output token throughput / Total Token throughput

    • Evalscope: Output token throughput / Total token throughput

  • Latency Metrics (Unit Differences)

    • vLLM: Reports in milliseconds (ms) for TTFT (Time to First Token), TPOT (Time Per Output Token), and ITL (Inter-Token Latency).

    • Evalscope: Reports in seconds (s) for TTFT, TPOT, and ITL, as well as for overall latency.

    • Conversion between the two: 1 ms = 0.001 s

  • Percentiles

    • vLLM: Reports percentile metrics such as mean, median, and P99.

    • Evalscope: Provides a more comprehensive percentile breakdown (e.g., 10%, 25%, 50% (median), 75%, 90%, 95%, 98%, 99%). This is helpful for analyzing tail latencies and variances.

Common Sources of Discrepancies and Troubleshooting Suggestions#

The following are common sources of discrepancies between vLLM and Evalscope performance results, along with tips for resolving them:

  1. Streaming vs. Non-Streaming

    • Both tools use token streaming by default to measure token-level outputs.

    • Ensure that no non-streaming paths are mistakenly mixed in, as this could affect metrics like TTFT, ITL, and throughput.

  2. Consistent Termination Criteria

    • Both tools must use identical settings for ending conditions. For example, ensure that ignore_eos and stop_tokens are consistently configured; otherwise, output lengths and metrics (e.g., TPOT/ITL) can diverge.

  3. Tokenizer and Prompt Template Consistency

    • Use the same tokenizer and implement a consistent prompt formatting template (e.g., for models like Qwen).

    • Specify the correct --tokenizer or --tokenizer-path in both tools.

  4. Decoding Parameters

    • Match decoding parameters such as temperature=0, top_p=1, top_k=0, and repetition_penalty.

    • Any inconsistency here can significantly affect both output length and latency metrics.

  5. Warm-Up

    • Perform a small batch of warm-up queries before large-scale benchmarking to eliminate the impacts of initial loading or model compilation overheads.

  6. Connection and Concurrency Settings

    • Ensure that both client-side connection pooling and server-side Keep-Alive settings are properly configured if running tests over a network.

    • Avoid DNS resolution delays or network jitter by running benchmarks locally (e.g., using 127.0.0.1 as the host).

  7. Resource Contention

    • Background processes, NVIDIA NVLink bandwidth, and PCIe throughput may introduce non-deterministic delays.

    • For consistent measurements, perform benchmarks in a stable and isolated environment.