From LLM Inference to Agentic Workloads: Characterization and Implications for Serving Systems — AI benchmark

Chaokun Chang, Yukun Zhou, Kaihua Fu, Dakai An, Tianyu Feng, Hanfeng Lu, Sheng Yao, Pu Guo, Yinghao Yu, Yizhou Shan, Bo Li, Binhang Yuan, Wei Wang/From LLM Inference to Agentic Workloads: Characterization and Implications for Serving SystemsUnknown

Agentic applications are shifting AI serving from isolated model inference to long-running workloads in which LLMs coordinate tools, environments, and persistent state. However, the system behavior of these workloads---where latency, cost, and bottlenecks arise---remains poorly characterized, leaving serving systems to rely on assumptions built for conventional inference. We present AgentSysBench, a benchmark suite and measurement toolkit with ten representative agentic applications and unified systems-level instrumentation. Across controlled deployments and production traces, we identify six properties that distinguish agentic workloads from conventional LLM serving: (1) execution is heavyweight and stateful, with non-LLM components dominating latency in 5 of 10 applications and sandbox working-set memory peaking at 28 GB per session; (2) applications compose components with heterogeneous resource affinity---GPU-bound inference, memory-bound retrieval, CPU-bound sandboxes---whose task latencies diverge by up to 32x; (3) bottlenecks shift across requests, models, and deployments; (4) production sessions hold state idle for minutes to hours between active steps; (5) a control-plane tax---auxiliary LLM calls and context overhead from tool schemas and observations---crowds out productive compute and context; and (6) production traces from three applications reveal heavy cross-request redundancy in search queries and web fetches, exposing a large caching opportunity. Four design explorations demonstrate that these findings are actionable: task-aware serving reduces latency by 29--40%, communication-aware placement by up to 4.5x, state offloading reduces memory usage by 4.6x, and tool-result caching removes 35.2% of redundant search calls and saves 19.3% of aggregate search latency.

benchmark

Stars0

Forks0

HF Downloads—30d

Last commit—

Refreshed1h ago

Project healthUnknownNo activity data.

Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.

Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.

AgentHub Score

55 / 100

Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →

Active project

55Score

Growth

40C

Activity

30C

Documentation

70C+

Maturity

45C

Community

42C

Production

58C

GitHub stars · 7 days observed0 not enough history

snapshots

Repository activity · 7 days observedReal snapshots from pushed_at

inactivepushed

2026-08-192026-08-27

Practical assessment

Should you use it?

✓ Best for

Research and experimentation
Prototype development
Learning agentic patterns

◎ Strengths

Active community
Open source
Well-documented API

✕ Not ideal for

Untested at scale without validation
Teams without AI/ML expertise

⚠ Watch-outs

Review changelog before updating
Verify license for commercial use

Technical details

What's inside

Language—

License—

Sourcearxiv

Open source✗ No

Commercial use—

Docs—

Demo—

PaperarXiv ↗

AgentHub Score

Score 55/100

Below average

Alternatives

RIFT-Bench: Dynamic Red-teaming For Agentic AI Systems

0 · benchmark

Automating Parent Selection Configuration in Genetic Programming with Agentic AI

0 · benchmark

Security Assessment of DeepSeek Harness with A.I.G: Evaluating Resistance to Indirect Prompt Injection

0 · benchmark

AI Slop and Hallucinations in Vulnerability Assessment: A Survey on Reasoning Failures and Trustworthy Mitigation

0 · benchmark

55 Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit ——

Indexed by AgentHub crawler1h ago

Monitor for new releasesongoing