TopoEP: Topology-Aware Load Balancing for Expert-Parallel MoE Training

Large-scale expert parallelism (EP) is becoming pivotal for training and serving frontier MoE models, but it also amplifies device-level expert load imbalance into compute stragglers, token all-to-all bottlenecks, and activation-memory spikes. Existing balancers redistribute experts periodically based on historical load, which becomes unreliable for production deployments with non-stationary load patterns. We present UltraEP, the first exact-load, real-time balancer for large-EP MoE training and serving prefill on rack-scale nodes (RSNs). Leveraging the extended scale-up connectivity among dozens of GPUs within RSNs, UltraEP rebalances every microbatch and layer on critical paths, which requires nontrivial co-design of plan solving and expert replication communication to minimize exposed overhead. To this end, UltraEP eagerly reacts to post-gating load with an efficient quota-driven planner, and executes the resulting irregular expert-state transfers with RSN-native persistent tile streaming and relay-based fan-out mitigation. We evaluate UltraEP in a multi-RSN deployment of up to 256 GPUs, using cutting-edge MoE models from 106B to 671B parameters. Averaged across training and serving, UltraEP achieves 94.3% of the force-balanced ideal throughput, delivering 1.49$\times$ improvement over no-balancing, while reducing the final inter-rank imbalance from 1.30$-$4.01 to 1.01$-$1.04.

In expert-parallel (EP) MoE serving, every layer synchronizes at the slowest GPU. Dispatchers balance token counts (EPLB, LPLB, UltraEP) or activated-expert counts (METRO), assuming expert time is linear in one. Measurements on two datacenter GPU generations show it is neither: below $\nstar\!\approx\!156$--$168$ tokens, HBM weight streaming dominates---cost attaches to \emph{activated replicas}, not tokens; above it, grouped GEMM rounds tokens to 128-tile $M$-tiles, so \emph{splitting} an expert adds padded compute. A max-affine profile $t=\max(a+bG,\,c+βN)$ captures both regimes. Realistic decode batches hold hot experts in the linear regime and cold in the flat \emph{simultaneously}; recorded batches show proxy dispatches differ by $1.4$--$1.6\times$ in modeled block time (p95 up to $1.7\times$), and \emph{which} proxy wins flips with the regime. We formalize per-batch dispatch as a fixed-charge makespan problem---NP-hard on two fully replicated GPUs, polynomial in degenerate limits---and present \sys{}, a makespan-aware dispatcher solving it in milliseconds off the critical path; its SGLang integration runs out-of-process and fuses dispatch with count collection into one in-graph kernel. Anchored by an 8-GPU TestbedA microbenchmark, \sys{} stays within 1% of the best fixed baseline everywhere and wins by up to $15.5\%$ where regimes mix. End-to-end on TestbedB, Qwen3-235B (inside the win region) gains $4$--$6\%$ throughput and cuts p99 latency by ${\sim}15.6\%$; DeepSeek-V3 (outside, communication-dominated) shows only mechanism cost. A phase diagram, not a universal win, is the claim: it predicts both outcomes before deployment.

Mixture-of-Expert (MoE) models enable efficient inference by employing smaller experts and activating only a subset of them per token. MoE serving engines distribute experts across multiple GPUs and route tokens to appropriate GPUs at inference time based on experts activated. They process tokens in lock-step fashion, where tokens within a batch must finish processing before proceeding to the next layer. This synchronization barrier acts as a critical bottleneck because the performance of MoE models is limited by the straggler GPU that finishes last. Stragglers emerge when too many heavily used experts are placed on the same GPU or the slowest GPU. While prior works place experts that balance token loads across GPUs, they all overlook GPU variability and often place highly used experts on the slowest GPUs. We propose GEM, GPU-variability-aware Expert Mapping, a framework for GPU variability-aware expert to GPU mapping for MoE models. GEM exploits two insights. First, we must place experts such that each GPU receives non-uniform token loads based on their variability and they all finish processing a layer at about the same time. Our studies show that there are two types of experts: consistent that are used most of the time and temporal that are often used together for the remaining time. Our second insight is that we must place simultaneously used consistent and temporal experts on different GPUs and avoid placing them on slower GPUs to reduce slowdown. GEM gathers the variability profile of GPUs for each model and task and uses the token load distributions per task to map experts to GPUs. Our experiments show that GEM improves end-to-end latency by 7.9% on average and by up to 16.5% compared to the baseline.