TurboQuant is starting to look like a case study in how to turn a fragile paper into a breakthrough story.

The attribution is thin, the “6x compression” headline is not clearly separated from prior KV-cache quantization baselines like KIVI, and the RaBitQ comparison is hard to take seriously: single-core CPU for the baseline, A100 GPU for TurboQuant. It is comparing apples-to-datacenter. Worse, there are also public OpenReview comments saying that even the reported accuracy results are not reproducible.

Hard to believe this is the standard for something being promoted as a breakthrough. If this came from a random startup blog, people would be much harsher about it.

I believe our claim at this point is more fundamental than just lack of citation.

The quantizer in TurboQuant is EDEN quantization (2021) applied to the KV-cache. It is neither a novel quantizer nor an improvement in quantization techniques.

In DRIVE/EDEN, we already introduced the version used in "TurboQuant"'s paper and suggested an optimal scale configurations which are better in both mse-minimizing and unbiased scenarios.