GKRootWire
Security ICE Signs $2M Deal for Zero-Click Phone Hacking ToolSecurity Attackers Exploit Critical Elementor Pro Bug to Hijack WordPress SitesAI ChatGPT Goes Down, Serves 404 Errors to UsersAI ChatGPT and Codex Suffer Widespread OutageAI Google DeepMind's WeatherNext 3 Sharpens AI Weather ForecastingAI Google's New AI Weather Model Sharpens Storm ForecastsSecurity ICE Signs $2M Deal for Zero-Click Phone Hacking ToolSecurity Attackers Exploit Critical Elementor Pro Bug to Hijack WordPress SitesAI ChatGPT Goes Down, Serves 404 Errors to UsersAI ChatGPT and Codex Suffer Widespread OutageAI Google DeepMind's WeatherNext 3 Sharpens AI Weather ForecastingAI Google's New AI Weather Model Sharpens Storm Forecasts
Dev Tools

Developer Uses OpenAI's Codex to Auto-Optimize a GPU Kernel 232x

An experimental 'auto-research' workflow let an AI coding agent iteratively rewrite and benchmark a kernel until it ran hundreds of times faster.

A developer detailed an experiment where they set OpenAI's Codex agent loose on a compute kernel with a simple loop: generate a variant, benchmark it, feed the results back, and repeat. Over many iterations, the AI-driven process discovered increasingly aggressive optimizations, ultimately landing on a version that ran 232 times faster than the original.

The write-up frames this as 'auto-research' — using an LLM not just to write code once, but to autonomously explore a search space of implementations, guided by real performance feedback rather than human intuition. The approach leans on Codex's ability to reason about low-level performance tricks (memory access patterns, parallelism, avoiding redundant work) and test them empirically instead of guessing.

Commenters on Hacker News were split between excitement about AI-assisted performance engineering and skepticism about how much of the gain came from fixing an unusually inefficient baseline.

Why it matters: This is a preview of a workflow shift: AI agents doing iterative, benchmark-driven optimization loops that used to require a human performance engineer's patience and expertise. The catch is that headline multipliers like '232x' often reflect a poorly optimized starting point, so the real signal is whether this generalizes to already-tuned production code.

Sources: Hacker News