The $qs$ Inequality: Quantifying the Double Penalty of Mixture-of-Experts at Inference

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) models reduce computation by routing each token to a small set of experts, but each selected expert is still used at a fixed precision. We present DPA-MoE, a runtime precision control framework that makes routed experts any-precision. DPA-MoE encodes expert feed-forward weights as prefix-decodable chunks using SharedScale AnyBCQ, profiles per-expert reconstruction residuals offline, and allocates chunks at inference time using live router gate scores. This post-routing allocation lets a single encoded MoE checkpoint operate at multiple effective weight budgets without retraining or re-encoding. Experiments on Qwen3-30B-A3B and DeepSeekMoE-16B show that DPA-MoE improves KL divergence and downstream accuracy over uniform chunk allocation at matched budgets, with modest steady-state throughput overhead in our prototype.

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) has become a practical architecture for scaling LLM capacity while keeping per-token compute modest, but deploying MoE models on a single, memory-limited GPU remains difficult because expert weights dominate the HBM footprint. Existing expert offloading and prefetching systems reduce the resident set, yet they often pay expert-loading costs on the critical path when activation becomes dense. Post-training quantization (PTQ) lowers the footprint without transfers, but prevailing pipelines fix expert bit-widths offline and assume routing remains stable, even though MoE expert utilization is heavy-tailed and the hot set can shift across workloads. We present DynaExq, a runtime-aware mixed-precision serving system that treats single-GPU MoE inference under a hard HBM envelope as an online, budget-constrained precision allocation problem. The key insight is to keep the experts that dominate runtime traffic resident at higher precision, while maintaining a low-precision fallback for the remaining experts, so the system can reduce transfer volume and avoid the waiting latency that limits offloading and prefetching under dense activation. DynaExq estimates long-horizon expert hotness from router traces, selects a per-layer high-precision resident set via a budget-feasible top-$n$ rule, and applies promotions and demotions asynchronously through stable expert handles so the forward pass always executes on a fully materialized expert version. Across Qwen3-MoE-30B/80B and six benchmarks, DynaExq improves accuracy over static PTQ on Qwen3-80B (73.09% to 77.57%) under comparable device-memory budgets and achieves up to 2.73x higher throughput than offloading/prefetch baselines at batch size 32.

Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) language models are often described as ideal for resource-constrained inference. Each token activates only a small subset of experts, so the per-token compute cost, in floating-point operations (FLOPs), resembles that of a much smaller dense model. Whether that FLOP advantage survives in practice is far less clear. We ask whether MoE models actually run faster and cheaper than comparable dense models on consumer-grade and edge hardware. We benchmark OLMoE-1B-7B (1.3 B active of 6.9 B total) against three dense baselines on an Apple M2 Pro and an NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano 8 GB through llama$.$cpp, measuring throughput, memory, and on-device energy. The answer is device-dependent: OLMoE's active-parameter advantage is only partly realised on the laptop (~10% behind the same-active Llama-3.2-1B) and erodes on the edge device (~31% behind, at 2.1$\times$ the energy per token, with peak memory at the 8 GB ceiling). Patching llama$.$cpp to time the decode graph node-by-node shows routing accounts for under 9% of MoE-block compute on the cleaner edge backend, so the gap reflects total-parameter memory footprint, expert dispatch, and KV-cache pressure rather than routing. The implication is that on bandwidth-bound edge hardware, inference cost tracks total parameters, not active ones, and sparse activation does not buy back what the device is constrained on. These findings are bounded to one MoE model at this parameter scale and two devices, and we release the full measurement harness and per-run data.