Back to LLMs Mind Map
中文·English
LLMsID: dense-vs-moe

Dense vs MoE

Dense vs MoE 对比
🎯Core Definition
Dense models activate all parameters per token; MoE activates only a subset of expert parameters per token (sparse activation). At the same active-parameter count (e.g., 37B active), MoE's total parameter count can be several times a Dense model's (DeepSeek-V3: 671B total / 37B active) — more capacity at the same compute; but MoE must store all expert weights, incurs all-to-all communication between experts, and costs more memory and scheduling complexity at serving time, with harder downstream compression (quantization/distillation).
💡Use Cases
MoE for pretraining when the compute budget is fixed but capability ceiling matters; Dense for latency-sensitive, memory-constrained, or maintenance-cost-sensitive mid/small deployments; in practice MoE is often re-compressed via distillation/quantization or balanced with shared-expert hybrid designs.
Key Problems Solved
Dense models hit a capacity ceiling under a fixed training-FLOP budget; MoE trades sparse activation for larger capacity but shifts the cost from training compute to serving memory and engineering complexity — the choice is fundamentally a capacity-vs-serving-cost trade-off.
🎯5 High-Frequency Exam Points
1
Capability difference between MoE and Dense at the same active-param count, and why?
2
Why is serving MoE more expensive?
3
What is MoE's all-to-all communication cost?
4
When should you pick Dense over MoE?
5
How is MoE compressed via quantization/distillation?
📖 In-depth Guide:📄 moe-architecture
Updated 2026-08-12
🎯
Test Your Knowledge: Practice Questions for "Dense vs MoE"
Single choice pitfall questions with instant feedback and mistake tracking.
🚀 Start Card Practice
Previous CardMoE Load BalancingNext CardChain-of-Thought

🔗 More LLMs Knowledge Cards

Agent & Tool CallingAlignment Tax & Preference DataScaled Dot-Product AttentionAttention Variants MHA/MQA/GQA