What is KV Cache in LLMs and How Does It Help?

TL;DR: KV cache is a memory optimization central to efficient LLM inference. It enables faster, longer, and more cost-effective generation by caching previously computed attention keys and values—unlocking the practical deployment of models like GPT-4o, Llama 3, etc.

1. Introduction

Generative AI, powered largely today by Large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4o, Llama 3, etc., is transforming AI applications, from chatbots to code assistants and multimodal reasoning. As these models scale in size and context length, inference becomes a major computational and memory challenge. The Key-Value (KV) cache is a pivotal optimization that enables practical, high-performance inference in modern transformer architectures.

In my experience, after speaking with many individuals, including customers at work (mostly enterprises), I’ve found that most don’t fully understand what a KV cache is or why they should care. In this post, I aim to provide an overview of what KV cache is, how it helps, and outline some recent research innovations. I also have simple code samples for practical understanding.

At the most basic level, a KV cache is a memory optimization technique used in LLMs to improve inference efficiency during generation. The KV cache stores the key and value tensors generated during the attention mechanism of transformer architectures, allowing models to avoid redundant computations when generating sequential text. To understand the KV cache, it’s essential to grasp how self-attention works in transformers.

2. Transformer Attention and the Role of KV Cache

As part of the transformer architecture, the attention mechanism enables models to dynamically assess the importance of various elements in the input sequence and calculate relationships between input tokens through three components: queries (Q), keys (K), and values (V).

For each token, the model computes:

• Query vectors ($Q$): Represent the current element seeking information
• Key vectors ($K$): Act as reference points for all elements in the sequence
• Value vectors ($V$): Contain the actual information that will be aggregated

The attention computation follows the formula: $$ \mathrm{Attention}(Q, K, V) = \mathrm{softmax} \left( \frac{QK^T}{\sqrt{d_k}} \right) V $$

LLMs are autoregressive; that is, text generation refers to the sequential process by which a model predicts each new token (word or subword) based on all previously generated tokens. This creates a dependency chain: every new token depends on the entire history of prior tokens. During autoregressive text generation, where models predict one token at a time using all previous tokens, the KV cache serves as a repository to “remember” the pre-computed key and value pairs from earlier tokens. Each new token requires attending to all previous tokens. Without optimization, this would necessitate recomputing all $K$ and $V$ matrices at every step, leading to quadratic time complexity.

3. The Caching Process

The KV cache stores the computed key and value tensors for all previously generated tokens. When generating a new token, only its key and value are computed and appended, while the model attends to the full cache. This caching reduces redundant computation, transforming each inference step’s complexity from quadratic to linear with respect to sequence length—a foundational efficiency for scaling LLMs to long contexts.

Without KV caching, transformers would have to recompute keys and values for all previous tokens during each generation step, resulting in quadratic computational complexity. The KV cache removes this inefficiency through the following process:

1. Initial Generation: When processing the first input token, the model calculates and stores its key and value vectors in the cache.
2. Subsequent Tokens: For each new token, the model only computes the key and value for that specific token.
3. Cache Appending: New key-value pairs are appended to the existing cache.
4. Attention Computation: The model uses the complete cached key-value history to compute attention with the current query.

This approach transforms the attention computation from quadratic $O(n^2)$ to linear $O(n)$ complexity in terms of sequence length.

Example: Minimal KV Cache in PyTorch. This class provides a minimal example of how to store and update key-value tensors for autoregressive generation in a transformer model.

class KVCache:
    def __init__(self):
        self.cache = {"key": None, "value": None}

    def update(self, key, value):
        if self.cache["key"] is None:
            self.cache["key"] = key
            self.cache["value"] = value
        else:
            self.cache["key"] = torch.cat([self.cache["key"], key], dim=1)
            self.cache["value"] = torch.cat([self.cache["value"], value], dim=1)

    def get_cache(self):
        return self.cache

4. Memory Requirements and Bottlenecks

There is no free lunch, of course, and there are also practical memory considerations. The memory footprint of the KV cache is substantial, especially for long contexts. For large models, this can easily consume tens of gigabytes for long sequences, often exceeding the memory needed for model weights themselves.

For example, with Llama-2-7B using half precision (FP16), for batch size 1, the KV cache consumes approximately 0.5MB per 1000 token. For a sequence of 28,000 tokens, this equals about 14GB of memory - the same amount required to store the entire model weights.

Research shows that the KV cache can consume over 30% of GPU memory during deployment and become the primary memory bottleneck for long-context applications. At a simplistic level, the required memory can be estimated as:

$$ \text{Memory} = 2 \times \text{Precision} \times \text{Layers} \times \text{ModelDim} \times \text{SeqLen} \times \text{BatchSize} $$

Note her:

• $\text{Precision}$ is typically 2 bytes (FP16)
• $\text{Layers}$ is the number of transformer layers
• $\text{ModelDim}$ (a.k.a Model Dimension) is the hidden size per layer

5. What Would Happen Without KV Cache?

Understanding the importance of KV cache becomes clearer when you contemplate the consequences of its absence. The overall experience would be significantly worse, characterized by high latency, shorter context windows, and increased costs.

• Severe slowdown: Every new token requires recomputing attention for all previous tokens, causing computation to grow quadratically with sequence length
• Unsustainable compute overhead: Each step repeats all previous attention calculations, wasting compute and energy.
• High latency and poor user experience: Users experience significant lag, especially for long-form or multi-turn conversations.
• Limited sequence lengths: Practical context limits shrink, and out-of-memory errors become common for large models.
• Inefficient hardware use: Lower throughput and increased energy consumption.
• No cache-level optimizations: No prompt reuse, no advanced memory management, and no opportunity for compression.

6. The New Trade-off: Cache Size vs. Model Performance

Recent studies have transformed the balance between KV cache size and model performance. Previously, decreasing the cache size directly impacted model quality, particularly for tasks that required long contexts or retrieval. Now, innovative approaches—utilizing quantization, pruning, and adaptive retention—enable significantly smaller caches, with minimal or virtually no decline in performance.

6.1. Token-Precision Trade-off: Quantized Pruning

A key breakthrough is the realization that storing more tokens at lower precision (quantized pruning) outperforms storing fewer tokens at high precision under the same memory budget.

• Key finding: For example storing 4x as many tokens in 4-bit precision outperforms storing 1x tokens in 16-bit precision, especially for long-context and retrieval tasks. Note that the $‘4x’$ factor depends on model architecture, context, and task.
• Result: Quantized pruning preserves long-range context and enables robust performance across task types, input lengths, and model scales, even in extreme memory-constrained scenarios.
• Stability: This method is robust across various pruning and quantization strategies, providing a new paradigm for cache compression.

Code Example: Quantized Pruning This function demonstrates how to select and quantize the most important tokens in the KV cache to maximize memory efficiency with minimal accuracy loss.

def quantized_pruning(kv_cache, importance_scores, num_tokens_to_keep, num_bits=4):
    # Select top tokens by importance
    top_indices = importance_scores.argsort()[-num_tokens_to_keep:]
    selected_kv = kv_cache[top_indices]

    # Quantize selected tokens
    scale = (selected_kv.max() - selected_kv.min()) / (2**num_bits - 1)
    quantized = ((selected_kv - selected_kv.min()) / scale).round().clamp(0, 2**num_bits - 1)

    return quantized, scale, selected_kv.min()

6.2. Adaptive and Selective Retention

Recent methods, such as FastGen and MorphKV, profile attention patterns at runtime to determine which tokens or cache entries are most relevant for each layer or head. This enables:

• Dynamic cache size: The cache adapts to attention diversity, keeping more entries where needed and aggressively compressing elsewhere.
• Constant-size caches: MorphKV, for instance, maintains a fixed-size cache by iteratively refining which tokens to keep using attention patterns, preserving long-range dependencies with minimal accuracy loss and >50% memory savings.
• Layer/head specialization: Different cache strategies can be applied to different layers or heads, rather than a one-size-fits-all approach.

6.3. Quantization for Throughput and Batch Size

Hardware-aware quantization (e.g., FP8, INT8, 4-bit) dramatically reduces memory requirements and enables higher effective batch sizes, especially in decode-heavy serving scenarios:

• Throughput gains: Quantizing the KV cache can provide up to 1.45× throughput improvement in real-world LLM serving, primarily by allowing more requests to be processed in parallel.
• Minimal accuracy loss: With careful quantization and dequantization strategies, there is little to no impact on model quality for most tasks.
• Implementation caveats: The speedup depends on the compatibility of quantized caches with high-performance attention kernels; some frameworks (e.g., TensorRT-LLM) benefit more than others (e.g., vLLM) depending on kernel optimizations.

6.4. System-Level Optimizations

Beyond algorithmic compression and adaptive retention, recent research has revealed significant performance gains through system-level KV cache optimizations. Frameworks like NVIDIA TensorRT-LLM and vLLM’s PagedAttention have re-architected cache management to resemble operating system virtual memory more closely, using paged or block-based KV storage to minimize memory fragmentation and enable efficient on-demand allocation.

Other innovations, such as FlowKV, introduce distributed and disaggregated cache management strategies to reduce cache transfer latency and better utilize hardware resources across multiple nodes.

These system-level enhancements complement algorithmic advances by improving scalability, throughput, and latency, ensuring that KV cache innovations are effectively translated into real-world production deployments, particularly for large-scale, multi-user LLM inference workloads.

7. Practical Implications

Efficient cache strategies have significant practical implications that affect both memory and computational requirements. By optimizing cache retention and compression techniques, these advancements create smaller yet smarter caches that free up resources. This enables larger batch sizes, longer context windows, and allows for deployment on less expensive or resource-constrained hardware. Such innovations greatly enhance the performance and scalability of language models, making them accessible to a wider range of users and applications.

Moreover, these strategies enhance cost-effectiveness by reducing hardware demands and energy consumption. This not only lowers the financial barriers to deploying language models but also promotes sustainability within the field of machine learning. Additionally, the ability to track long-range dependencies with optimized cache management proves invaluable for tasks such as document retrieval, multi-turn dialogue generation, and summarization. These improvements underscore the importance of adaptive and efficient KV cache techniques in advancing the performance of large language models.

8. Conclusion

KV cache management is a cornerstone of efficient LLM inference, especially as models scale and the size of the context windows expands. The field has rapidly advanced from basic caching to sophisticated, adaptive, and task-aware strategies that strike a balance between memory, speed, and accuracy. Without KV cache, modern LLMs would be too slow, costly, and limited for today’s real-world applications. As research continues, expect even more advanced cache management, enabling efficient inference for ever-larger models and longer contexts.

References