MTP is all about acceptance rate

So I was very excited about the MTP stuff especially since Gemma4 has become my "daily driver" for some stuff. I grabbed the latest mlx-vlm and did some tests and found it disappointing. | Workload | MTP off | MTP on | Result | Draft accept rate | |---|---|---|---|---| | Code generation | 75 tok/s | 114.8 tok/s | 1.53× faster | 66% of slots | | Long-form prose | 75 tok/s | 71.1 tok/s | 0.95× (wash) | 31% of slots | | JSON output | 51.3 tok/s | 25.6 tok/s | **0.50× slower** | 8% of slots | - Code generation was the typical "Write some python functions to do X" - Long form prose was "Write an 800 word essay on paper money in the Tang Dynasty" - JSON output was my core use case where I'm handing the LLM a list of items, asking it to group them by similarity according to some rules and then get them back in a structured output*. So if you want to use it for local coding, MTP is great. If you're not, maybe not so hot. My regression testing seems to indicate that once token acceptance dips below 50% the overhead kills the benefit. All this on an M4 Max Studio w/Gemma4-26b-a4b *Bonus for you hackers: Gemma's JSON structure instruction following is pretty good and I find using structured output to be about a 20% hit to token generation. It is faster to just accept a little bit of sloppy JSON and massage it at runtime; so all this is with json_schema off which mlx-vlm doesn't support for spec-decode anyway