FP8 (E4M3) acceleration for attention computation offers significant throughput gains, but the 3-bit mantissa introduces precision challenges when the softmax probability matrix~
P is cast to FP8 before the
P⋅V matrix multiplication. We analyze two implementation choices that affect output precision under the \emph{Attention Sink} phenomenon: (1)~the KV block iteration order, and (2) the static scaling factor applied to
P before casting. We show that forward KV iteration causes \emph{P-collapse} -- to leading order a fraction
Φ(Δ+δk−6.93−lnS) of non-sink
P values underflow to zero, where the small shift
δk≈1 (for
ksink=4) is the expected within-sink-block score maximum -- and that reverse iteration removes it, with a zero-underflow guarantee when reverse is combined with
S=256. We further give a constructive characterization of
S=256=28 as the static scale that simultaneously satisfies (i)~bit-exact IEEE 754 scaling, (ii) the lower envelope of a sawtooth function
dp(S) over the E4M3 number line (
dp=2−4, the minimum worst-case quantization step), and (iii)~the maximum normal-range coverage \emph{among bit-exact (
2k) scales} (a non-bit-exact scale such as
448 attains slightly higher coverage; sec.5}). Both optimizations are already deployed in FlashAttention-3/4 on engineering grounds; our contribution is a quantitative account of \emph{why} these choices are good and a closed-form threshold
Δc=6.93+lnS−δk for predicting kernel-level precision loss. Kernel-faithful experiments (
Q,K,V in FP32 to isolate the P-cast effect) show
3-
10× MSE improvement at moderate sink strengths, and paired tests confirm both fixes saturate to the same precision floor when combined -- which motivated updating the hpc-ops kernel from
S=1 to
S=256.