Their numerical results with GPUs, compared to Gurobi, are quite impressive [1]. In my opinion (unless I'm missing something), the key benefits of their algorithms lie in the ability to leverage GPUs and the fact that there’s no need to store factorization in memory. However, if the goal is to solve a small problem on a CPU that fits comfortably in memory, there may be no need to use this approach.
I agree that their results are impressive. Just to be clear, however:
1. They compare their solver with a 1e-4 error tolerance to Gurobi with 1e-6. This may seem like a detail, but in the context of how typical LPs are formulated, this is a big difference. They have to do things this way because their solver simply isn't able to reach better accuracy (meanwhile, you can ask Gurobi for 1e-9, and it will happily comply in most cases).
2. They disable presolve, which is 100% reasonable in a scientific paper (makes things more reproducible, gives a better idea of what the solver actually does). If you look at their results to evaluate which solver you should use, though, the results will be misleading, because presolve is a huge part of what makes SOTA solvers fast.
hmm... I am reading [1] right now. When looking at their Table 7 and Table 11 in [1], they report comparison results with Gurobi presolve enabled and 1e-8 error. Do I miss anything?
Their performance isn't quite as good as Gurobi's barrier method, but it's still within a reasonable factor, which is impressive.
Regarding presolve: When they test their solver "with presolve", they use Gurobi's presolve as a preprocessing step, then run their solver on the output. To be clear, this is perfectly fair, but from the perspective of "can I switch over from the solver I'm currently using", this is a big caveat.
They indeed report being 5x slower than Gurobi at 1e-8 precision on Mittelmann instances, which is great. Then again, Mittelmann himself reports them as 15x off COpt, even when allowed to do 1e-4. This is perfectly explainable (COpt is great at benchmarks; there is the presolve issue above; the Mittelmann instance set is a moving target), but I would regard the latter number as more useful from a practitioner's perspective.
This is not to diminish PDLP's usefulness. If you have a huge instance, it may be your only option!
[1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/2311.12180
reply