Framework Survey: FSDP2 vs Megatron-Core vs DeepSpeed vs Torchtitan vs Nanotron vs MaxText

Teams have shipped training code on PyTorch FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample, Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample, torchtitan-shaped patterns, DeepSpeed, and MaxText-inspired TPU setups. This post is a practical map of which framework is good at what in 2026, what the gaps are, and why different hardware lanes often end up using different stacks on purpose. It reads best next to FSDP CUDA and Megatron DDP and what Megatron can and cannot split, because those posts show how the abstract framework choice turns into concrete ownership boundaries.

Reader-first version: DDP is the simple data-parallel replica baseline, FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample via torch.distributed.fsdp.fully_shard is still a DPQuick term guideDPData parallelism replicates the whole model on every GPU and each GPU trains on a different slice of the batch (global_bs = local_bs × DP). After backward, gradients all-reduce across the DP GPUs so every replica ends the step with identical weights. Cost: one all-reduce per step sized to the full model — on 8× H200 a 70B model is about 140 GB of gradient traffic every step. Plain DDP keeps the whole model + optimizer state on every GPU; FSDP / ZeRO-3 shards them across the DP mesh to recover that memory. Use DP to raise throughput, not to fit a bigger model — that's FSDP's job.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: FSDP sharding sample Reference: FSDP on CUDA and Megatron DDP-family sharding API, and Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample is the NVIDIA-specialized host when you need Transformer EngineQuick term guideTransformer EngineNVIDIA's Transformer Engine library path for accelerated Transformer modules and lower-precision training surfaces such as FP8, kept behind optional adapter seams in these posts.GroundingAbout: Transformer Engine on H200 and Blackwell-class GPUs: the bridge we use Reference: NVIDIA Transformer Engine documentation Reference: Transformer Engine FP8 and FP4 primer kernels plus TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding, EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding, and PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample at scale. If you want the axis map first, start with EP, PP, TP, CP, SP, DP and FSDP CUDA and Megatron DDP.

Why this matters

Framework choice is a tax on everything that comes after. The wrong choice means you spend months reimplementing sequence-parallel norm grad sync, or diagnosing silent FP8Quick term guideFP8Eight-bit floating-point training and inference formats used to trade precision for throughput and memory on recent accelerator lanes.GroundingAbout: precision recipe: FP16, BF16, FP8, NVFP4 History: FP8 rollout notes Reference: Megatron FLCE on Hopper scope mismatches, or rewriting your data loader when you move from a research meshQuick term guidemeshThe named device grid that defines which logical axis maps to which TPU or distributed-device axis before sharding annotations make sense.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations Example: 3D parallelism sample Reference: FSDP2 on XLA TPU to a production meshQuick term guidemeshThe named device grid that defines which logical axis maps to which TPU or distributed-device axis before sharding annotations make sense.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations Example: 3D parallelism sample Reference: FSDP2 on XLA TPU. The right choice means the boring distributed-systems machinery is already solved and you can spend your time on architecture. We have bled enough on each of these frameworks to pick deliberately per lane rather than picking one and hoping.

What teams use today

Three distributed paths commonly show up side by side:

An XLA SPMDQuick term guideXLA SPMDThe explicit TPU sharding mode where one compiled program carries placement rules instead of rank-local imperative code.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations About: XLA SPMD tokenizer and vocab on TPU Example: TPU backend ownership note ZeRO-3 style TPU runtime walks the model, builds a per-parameter sharding spec over a ("data", "model", "expert") meshQuick term guidemeshThe named device grid that defines which logical axis maps to which TPU or distributed-device axis before sharding annotations make sense.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations Example: 3D parallelism sample Reference: FSDP2 on XLA TPU, and hands those annotations to xs.mark_sharding. The same ownership discipline is unpacked further in XLA SPMD sharding annotations. The XLA compiler inserts the required all-gather, reduce-scatter, and all-to-all collectives during compilation. There is no step-time Python communication schedulerQuick term guideschedulerThe per-specialist serving control loop that admits, batches, preempts, and commits work after routing but before the decode kernel touches KV state.GroundingAbout: inference serving stack Reference: observability and SLO dashboards Reference: KV cache and paged attention in that model; the collectives are HLO ops.

A CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200 FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample wrapper uses torch.distributed.fsdp.fully_shard. On the simpler CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200 lane it sits after the model's TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding decisions and before the optimizer; on the fuller PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample lane the compiled stage-local core usually stays inside that boundary, with FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample wrapping outside the compiled region. It has the usual FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample knobs such as reshard_after_forward and prefetch control. One practical caveat remains important: if LoRA injection happens after fully_shard, the fresh LoRA parameters are not FSDP-managed and need explicit gradient synchronization hooks.

A native PyTorch path composes PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample + FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample + EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding, optionally with TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding as a fourth axis, for CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200 runs that need 3D parallelism. Teams often summarize that lane as "TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding + PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample + FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample + EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding", but the stage split usually lands first, then TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding inside the stage-local core, then activation checkpointing and compile, then FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample outside the compiled region, and finally EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding where the model actually needs routing. This is the heaviest-weight path and it remains useful when PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample is the only realistic answer for models that do not fit in a single DPQuick term guideDPData parallelism replicates the whole model on every GPU and each GPU trains on a different slice of the batch (global_bs = local_bs × DP). After backward, gradients all-reduce across the DP GPUs so every replica ends the step with identical weights. Cost: one all-reduce per step sized to the full model — on 8× H200 a 70B model is about 140 GB of gradient traffic every step. Plain DDP keeps the whole model + optimizer state on every GPU; FSDP / ZeRO-3 shards them across the DP mesh to recover that memory. Use DP to raise throughput, not to fit a bigger model — that's FSDP's job.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: FSDP sharding sample Reference: FSDP on CUDA and Megatron DDP stage.

The integration layer around Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample exists because teams use it when they want Transformer EngineQuick term guideTransformer EngineNVIDIA's Transformer Engine library path for accelerated Transformer modules and lower-precision training surfaces such as FP8, kept behind optional adapter seams in these posts.GroundingAbout: Transformer Engine on H200 and Blackwell-class GPUs: the bridge we use Reference: NVIDIA Transformer Engine documentation Reference: Transformer Engine FP8 and FP4 primer kernels, TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding/EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding communication overlap, and a distributed optimizer with bucket coalescing. The less glamorous lesson from that lane is that bucket sizes, padding boundaries, and chunking rules are topology-tuned policy, not folklore; copying the mechanism without copying the numeric alignment rules is one of the fastest ways to lose the overlap benefit you thought you were importing.

On the TPU side, a torch_xla path informed by MaxText-style flag taxonomy is common. VMEM limits, continuation-fusion settings, and SparseCore-related flags are treated as tuning surfaces rather than folklore. Borrowing that public taxonomy is much cheaper than rediscovering it from trial and error.

Some teams no longer ship a DeepSpeed path in the main repo after evaluating it early, keeping a few patterns such as bucketed gradient reduction and distributed-optimizer ideas, then moving the implementation onto Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample or native PyTorch. The remaining DeepSpeed-shaped niche is the offload-heavy lane, where ZeRO-Infinity is still a pragmatic memory-relief tool even when it is not the default NVIDIA answer.

How it lands in practice

The NVIDIA path is narrower. Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample is often the host on that lane, with model families written against Megatron abstractions directly. There is usually no FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample path in the main NVIDIA training lane; Megatron DDP with the distributed optimizer is the production choice there.

The TPU lane keeps the XLA SPMDQuick term guideXLA SPMDThe explicit TPU sharding mode where one compiled program carries placement rules instead of rank-local imperative code.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations About: XLA SPMD tokenizer and vocab on TPU Example: TPU backend ownership note path. MeshQuick term guidemeshThe named device grid that defines which logical axis maps to which TPU or distributed-device axis before sharding annotations make sense.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations Example: 3D parallelism sample Reference: FSDP2 on XLA TPU shapes are chosen from ("data",), ("data", "model"), ("data", "expert"), or ("data", "expert", "model") depending on TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding and EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding sizes. torch.compile is kept off on XLA; the TPU compile contract is per-micro-step torch_xla.compile() around forward and backward.

In a mixed-hardware organization, Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample specs often stay on NVIDIA while an XLA path serves Google hardware. Model code can remain one source of truth even when kernel paths fork at the spec boundary.

Ablations and what we kept

PyTorch FSDP / FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample. FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample is the upstream-blessed path now. Meta's PyTorch team documents it as the recommended direction for new training code, with per-parameter DTensorQuick term guideDTensorPyTorch's mesh-backed distributed-tensor abstraction: one logical tensor with explicit shard or replica metadata across ranks.GroundingAbout: EP / PP / TP / CP / SP / DP overview Example: 3D parallelism sample Reference: FSDP2 on XLA TPU sharding and a cleaner migration story than FSDP1. For a CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200 lane it is the baseline when you do not need TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding or PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample: a single-node dense run, or a small MoEQuick term guideMoEToken Choice vs Expert Choice, null-expert debugging, gating stability, and the production routing decisions behind the MegaCpp SLM Ensemble.GroundingThe MoE Routing We Actually Shipped Sequence, Context, and Expert Splits in the Hybrid Stack where EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding=1. The good: it composes with torch.compile by default in 2.4+, the mp_policy story (param/reduce/buffer dtypes separately controlled) works, and FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample + FP8Quick term guideFP8Eight-bit floating-point training and inference formats used to trade precision for throughput and memory on recent accelerator lanes.GroundingAbout: precision recipe: FP16, BF16, FP8, NVFP4 History: FP8 rollout notes Reference: Megatron FLCE on Hopper via torchao.Float8Linear is ergonomically clean if you wrap in the right order. The bad: it does not give you TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding or PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample; you compose those yourself. For anything past roughly one node of dense training, teams often end up on Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample.

Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample. The ceiling for NVIDIA training. Transformer EngineQuick term guideTransformer EngineNVIDIA's Transformer Engine library path for accelerated Transformer modules and lower-precision training surfaces such as FP8, kept behind optional adapter seams in these posts.GroundingAbout: Transformer Engine on H200 and Blackwell-class GPUs: the bridge we use Reference: NVIDIA Transformer Engine documentation Reference: Transformer Engine FP8 and FP4 primer integration is where MFU comes from on Hopper and Blackwell: TELayerNormColumnParallelLinear + TERowParallelLinear + TEDotProductAttention with userbuffer comm-overlap, fused RoPEQuick term guideRoPERotary positional embedding: the complex-plane rotation applied to a chosen Q/K slice so attention carries relative position without a learned absolute-position table.GroundingAbout: fused MLA on NVIDIA History: long context and attention sinks Reference: shared MLA adapter boundaries, fused masked softmax, and a working fp8_autocast recipe. TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding and EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding communication overlap is not theoretical. The distributed optimizer buckets gradients by parameter count with NVLink/NVSwitch-aware padding, coalesces reduce-scatters through _coalescing_manager, and overlaps param gather with compute. The cost: it is NVIDIA-shaped. TransformerConfig is a Procrustean bed for hybrid architectures, and features without analogues often need adapter work at the ModuleSpec / TransformerConfig seam rather than one more runtime wrapper. Porting to Megatron: friction points that were structural, not cosmetic is the narrower continuation for that boundary.

DeepSpeed. ZeRO-1/2/3, 3D parallelism, ZeRO-Infinity, and MoEQuick term guideMoEToken Choice vs Expert Choice, null-expert debugging, gating stability, and the production routing decisions behind the MegaCpp SLM Ensemble.GroundingThe MoE Routing We Actually Shipped Sequence, Context, and Expert Splits in the Hybrid Stack primitives in one package. It is genuinely productive for teams that inherited it early, and the ZeRO offload paths are still competitive for memory-bound experiments. Where it is not our first pick in 2026: the moment you want TE fused kernels and FP8Quick term guideFP8Eight-bit floating-point training and inference formats used to trade precision for throughput and memory on recent accelerator lanes.GroundingAbout: precision recipe: FP16, BF16, FP8, NVFP4 History: FP8 rollout notes Reference: Megatron FLCE on Hopper, you are gravitating back to Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample; the moment you want the cleanest upstream-PyTorch integration, you are on FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample. DeepSpeed sits in between and does not decisively win either axis for our workloads. We respect it; we are not running it as the main host framework.

torchtitan. Not a framework so much as a reference implementation of how to do FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample + TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding + PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample + Float8 + compile in native PyTorch, without a framework wrapper. Use torchtitan as a pattern source, not as a dependency.

nanotron. Minimalist 3D-parallel PyTorch library from Hugging Face. It is readable and teaches the abstractions well. It is useful as a conceptual reference, but not as the main production training lane.

MaxText. The JAXQuick term guideJAXA separate frontend above PJRT/libtpu. In these TPU posts it mainly matters as the owner of NamedSharding, PartitionSpec, and the optional call_jax or Pallas-adjacent bridge lanes.GroundingAbout: libtpu and JAX interaction Reference: libtpu / PJRT / JAX ownership boundaries Reference: Pallas on TPU/TPU flagship. Production-grade on TPU v5e/v5p/v6e/v7, written against JAXQuick term guideJAXA separate frontend above PJRT/libtpu. In these TPU posts it mainly matters as the owner of NamedSharding, PartitionSpec, and the optional call_jax or Pallas-adjacent bridge lanes.GroundingAbout: libtpu and JAX interaction Reference: libtpu / PJRT / JAX ownership boundaries Reference: Pallas on TPU and XLA from the start, and the source of most of the real-world libtpuQuick term guidelibtpuThe TPU backend library that pairs with PJRT/XLA and owns device-side execution underneath the frontend.GroundingAbout: libtpu / PJRT ownership boundaries Example: TPU backend ownership note Example: XLA runtime probe sample tuning knowledge in the open-source world. Our TPU flag bundle is a descendant, which is the right level of dependency: we inherit the flag taxonomy and the value ranges, we do not take on JAXQuick term guideJAXA separate frontend above PJRT/libtpu. In these TPU posts it mainly matters as the owner of NamedSharding, PartitionSpec, and the optional call_jax or Pallas-adjacent bridge lanes.GroundingAbout: libtpu and JAX interaction Reference: libtpu / PJRT / JAX ownership boundaries Reference: Pallas on TPU. Trying to run MaxText directly would have meant rewriting our model in JAXQuick term guideJAXA separate frontend above PJRT/libtpu. In these TPU posts it mainly matters as the owner of NamedSharding, PartitionSpec, and the optional call_jax or Pallas-adjacent bridge lanes.GroundingAbout: libtpu and JAX interaction Reference: libtpu / PJRT / JAX ownership boundaries Reference: Pallas on TPU, which is a non-starter for a codebase that also runs on CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200.

T5X. Mature JAXQuick term guideJAXA separate frontend above PJRT/libtpu. In these TPU posts it mainly matters as the owner of NamedSharding, PartitionSpec, and the optional call_jax or Pallas-adjacent bridge lanes.GroundingAbout: libtpu and JAX interaction Reference: libtpu / PJRT / JAX ownership boundaries Reference: Pallas on TPU research framework, mostly seq2seq and Google-research-shaped workflows. It is not where frontier decoder-only LLMs train in 2026; MaxText has absorbed that role on the JAXQuick term guideJAXA separate frontend above PJRT/libtpu. In these TPU posts it mainly matters as the owner of NamedSharding, PartitionSpec, and the optional call_jax or Pallas-adjacent bridge lanes.GroundingAbout: libtpu and JAX interaction Reference: libtpu / PJRT / JAX ownership boundaries Reference: Pallas on TPU side. We have not used it and do not plan to.

The ablations that stuck are mostly cross-framework pattern transfer: bucket-size defaults inspired by Megatron guidance, overlap and prefetch ideas influenced by torchtitan, and TPU memory controls informed by MaxText. The bigger lesson is that no single framework is complete for a hybrid architecture.

Lane assignments

Here is a representative split in 2026:

NVIDIA pre-training lane: Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample is the host, TE kernels do the compute, and Megatron DDP with the distributed optimizer does the communication. A native-PyTorch path remains available for runs where you deliberately want FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample + PPQuick term guidePPPipeline parallelism cuts the model by depth — each GPU gets a contiguous range of layers. 32 transformer blocks on 8× H200 with PP=8 puts 4 layers on each GPU. Weights and optimizer state live only on the GPU owning that stage; activations flow GPU0→GPU1→... forward and back on the reverse pass. Cost: a pipeline bubble of roughly 1/microbatches — you need many microbatches per step to amortize. Use PP to scale past a single NVLink island across nodes, because what crosses the wire is tiny stage-boundary activations, not full tensors.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: pipeline parallel sample Example: pipeline activation sample + EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding control, usually for architecture debugging where you need finer-grained control than Megatron gives.

TPU pre-training lane: torch_xla with SPMD ZeRO-3 over a meshQuick term guidemeshThe named device grid that defines which logical axis maps to which TPU or distributed-device axis before sharding annotations make sense.GroundingAbout: XLA SPMD sharding annotations Example: 3D parallelism sample Reference: FSDP2 on XLA TPU that scales to ("data", "expert", "model"). MaxText-informed flag taxonomy is applied before torch_xla import. XLA-safe optimizer variants avoid Python scalar recompiles via device tensors. torch.compile is off; torch_xla.compile() wraps forward and backward per micro-step.

In a mixed-hardware organization, Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample specs often stay on NVIDIA while an XLA path serves Google hardware. Model code can remain one source of truth even when kernel paths fork at the spec boundary.

Production checklist

• Pick one host framework per lane and adapt, do not chain frameworks inside a single training run.
• On NVIDIA, route through Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample when you want TE fusion and TPQuick term guideTPTensor parallelism splits each linear's weights (QKV, O, MLP gate/up/down) across GPUs. On 8× H200 with TP=8 each GPU owns 1/8 of every matmul's columns or rows, so one big matmul becomes 8 smaller ones that all-reduce at the layer boundary. Cost: one all-reduce per attention and per MLP — heavy bandwidth, so TP is usually bound to a single NVLink/NVSwitch island (1 node of up to 8 GPUs). Embeddings, layernorms, and optimizer state stay replicated across the TP GPUs. Use TP when a single layer's weights don't fit on one GPU, not to scale past one node.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: TP partition-shape sample Reference: tensor parallel and sharding/EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding overlap; fall back to FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample + torchtitan patterns when you need PyTorch-native control.
• On TPU, stay on torch_xla SPMD with MaxText-derived flags; do not try to port Megatron's comm overlap; XLA already owns that side.
• Keep torch.compile off on XLA; keep it on for CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200 FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample unless a rank-symmetric collective issue forces eager mode.
• When porting a pattern from framework X to framework Y, copy the numeric constants (bucket sizes, alignment rules) verbatim; they encode months of tuning.
• On Megatron-CoreQuick term guideMegatron CoreThe NVIDIA framework surface MegaCpp ports into through narrow adapters, layer specs, and runtime ownership bridges.GroundingAbout: Porting to Megatron friction About: Nemotron-style recipe as pure Megatron CLI Example: Mamba3 TP mixer sample, treat bucket padding and chunking rules as correctness policy as well as speed policy.
• For mixed MoEQuick term guideMoEToken Choice vs Expert Choice, null-expert debugging, gating stability, and the production routing decisions behind the MegaCpp SLM Ensemble.GroundingThe MoE Routing We Actually Shipped Sequence, Context, and Expert Splits in the Hybrid Stack + dense runs, the EPQuick term guideEPExpert parallelism partitions MoE experts across GPUs — 64 experts on 8× H200 with EP=8 means each GPU owns the full weights of 8 experts. Each token routes to its chosen expert via all-to-all (to the GPU holding that expert), the FFN runs there, then all-to-all sends outputs back. Cost: two all-to-alls per MoE layer plus load imbalance when hot experts overload their owner. Attention, embeddings, and shared dense weights stay replicated across the EP dimension. Use EP when expert weights dominate total model size.GroundingAbout: parallelism map overview Example: expert-parallel routing sample Reference: expert parallel and MoE sharding dispatcher choice (alltoall vs allgather) is a framework-level decision, not a model-level one.
• When FSDP2Quick term guideFSDP2PyTorch's Fully Sharded Data Parallel v2 wrapper API. On CUDA it shards parameters, gradients, and optimizer state across the data-parallel group; in the TPU/XLA posts here it is usually a memory-goal analogy, not the actual eager wrapper mechanism.GroundingAbout: FSDP2 on XLA TPU History: FSDP2 pain and payoff Example: FSDP sharding sample wraps your model and LoRA is injected later, register explicit grad all-reduce hooks on the LoRA params.
• Pin TPU runtime versions per a written TPU setup contract; do not upgrade mid-run.

Lane summary

A typical CUDAQuick term guideCUDANVIDIA's GPU programming stack: compiler, runtime, driver, libraries, and kernel toolchain used by CUDA training and inference lanes.GroundingAbout: XLA vs CUDA stack decisions History: GB10 tensor-path proof summary Reference: training on 8x H200 wrap order, kept identical between specialists so the planner can reason about it:

model = build_specialist(cfg)
model = wrap_pp(model, pp_mesh)                  # only if PP > 1
model = wrap_tp(model, tp_mesh)
model = apply_activation_checkpointing(model)    # optional
model = compile_stage_local_core(model)          # optional
model = apply_cuda_fsdp(model, dp_mesh)          # bottom-up outer wrapper
model = apply_ep(model, ep_mesh)                 # MoE specialists only
optimizer = build_optimizer_for_lane(model)