Site icon Efficient Coder

LLM Architectures 2025: Transformer Efficiency and Innovation Breakthroughs

高效码农

The Evolution of LLM Architectures in 2025: Balancing Efficiency and Innovation

Seven years after the original GPT architecture emerged, core Transformer designs remain remarkably resilient. As we peel back the layers of datasets and training techniques, what fundamental innovations are truly advancing large language models?

Key Architectural Innovations at a Glance

Key Innovation Leading Models Primary Advantage Technical Approach
MLA Attention DeepSeek-V3/R1 68% KV cache reduction Key-value vector compression
Sliding Window Attn. Gemma 3 40% context memory savings Localized attention focus
Mixture-of-Experts Llama 4/Qwen3 17-37B active params from 100B+ Dynamic expert routing
Positionless Encoding SmolLM3 Better long-text generalization Implicit positioning via masking
QK Normalization OLMo 2/Gemma 3 3x training stability improvement Attention input normalization

1. The Efficiency Revolution in Attention Mechanisms

1.1 From Multi-Head to Grouped-Query Attention (GQA)

Traditional Multi-Head Attention (MHA) requires independent key-value calculations per head. Grouped-Query Attention (GQA) optimizes this by having multiple query heads share key-value projections:

graph LR
    Input[Token Sequence] --> QueryHead1[Query Head 1]
    Input --> QueryHead2[Query Head 2]
    Input --> QueryHead3[Query Head 3]
    Input --> QueryHead4[Query Head 4]
    KVGroup1[Key-Value Group 1] --> QueryHead1 & QueryHead2
    KVGroup2[Key-Value Group 2] --> QueryHead3 & QueryHead4

Performance Impact:

  • 30-40% reduction in KV cache memory
  • 25% faster inference (Llama 3 benchmarks)

1.2 Latent Attention Compression (MLA): DeepSeek’s Breakthrough

Multi-Head Latent Attention (MLA) implements radical compression:

  1. Training: Projects keys (K), values (V), and queries (Q) into low-dimensional space
  2. Inference: Compresses only K/V for storage, decompressing during usage
# MLA core implementation logic
class MultiHeadLatentAttention(nn.Module):
    def forward(self, x):
        # Project and compress key/value vectors
        k_compressed = self.k_compressor(self.W_k(x))  
        v_compressed = self.v_compressor(self.W_v(x))
        
        # Store compressed vectors in KV cache
        update_kv_cache(k_compressed, v_compressed)
        
        # Decompress for attention computation
        k_full = self.k_decompressor(k_cache) 
        v_full = self.v_decompressor(v_cache)
        
        return compute_attention(q, k_full, v_full)

Efficiency Gains: 2.1% higher MMLU scores than GQA at comparable scales (DeepSeek-V2 findings)

1.3 Sliding Window Attention: Gemma 3’s Memory Optimizer

Sliding Window Attention replaces global attention with localized focus:

  • Gemma 2: 4,096-token window per layer
  • Gemma 3: Only 1 global attention layer per 5 local layers + 1,024-token window
graph TD
    Token1[Position 1] --> Window1[Attends positions 1-1024]
    Token2[Position 2] --> Window2[Attends positions 2-1025]
    TokenN[Position N] --> WindowN[Attends positions N to N+1023]

Memory Impact: 40% KV cache reduction with <1% perplexity increase (Gemma 3 benchmarks)

2. Mixture-of-Experts (MoE): Scaling to Trillion-Parameter Models

2.1 How MoE Architectures Work

MoE replaces standard FeedForward layers with multiple expert networks, dynamically routing tokens:

graph LR
    Token[Input Token] --> Router
    Router --> Expert1[Expert Network 1]
    Router --> Expert2[Expert Network 2]
    Router --> ExpertN[Expert Network N]
    Expert1 --> Output[Weighted Output]
    Expert2 --> Output
    ExpertN --> Output

2.2 2025’s Three MoE Design Philosophies

Model Total Experts Active Experts Key Innovation
DeepSeek-V3 256 8 + 1 shared Shared expert for common patterns
Llama 4 Maverick 128 2 Alternating MoE/dense layers
Qwen3 235B 64 8 No shared expert implementation

Inference Efficiency: DeepSeek-V3’s 67.1B parameter model activates only 3.7B parameters (5.5%) per token

3. Normalization Breakthroughs

3.1 The Pre-Norm vs. Post-Norm Evolution

graph TB
    subgraph Pre-Norm
    Input --> Norm[RMSNorm] --> Attention --> Add[Add Residual]
    end

    subgraph OLMo2 Post-Norm
    Input --> Attention --> Norm[RMSNorm] --> Add[Add Residual]
    end

    subgraph Gemma3 Hybrid
    Input --> Norm1[RMSNorm] --> Attention --> Norm2[RMSNorm] --> Add[Add Residual]
    end

OLMo 2’s Choice: Post-Norm reduced training loss fluctuations by 60% (Figure 9 in source)

3.2 QK Normalization: Stabilizing Attention

Normalizing queries and keys before attention computation:

class GroupedQueryAttention(nn.Module):
    def __init__(self, qk_norm=True):
        if qk_norm:
            self.q_norm = RMSNorm(head_dim)  # Query normalization
            self.k_norm = RMSNorm(head_dim)  # Key normalization

    def forward(self, queries, keys):
        if self.q_norm: 
            queries = self.q_norm(queries)
        if self.k_norm: 
            keys = self.k_norm(keys)
        attn_scores = queries @ keys.transpose(2, 3)

Impact: Enables stable training for models >8B parameters

4. Positional Encoding Innovations

4.1 2025’s Positional Encoding Landscape

pie
    title Positional Encoding Techniques in 2025 Models
    “Rotary (RoPE)” : 78
    “Absolute Embeddings” : 15
    “None (NoPE)” : 7

4.2 SmolLM3’s Radical Approach: Eliminating Positional Encoding

No Positional Encoding (NoPE) leverages inherent token ordering:

“Causal attention masks inherently provide positional information—each token at position t can only attend to tokens ≤ t“

Performance Findings:

  • 12% lower perplexity on PG-19 long-text benchmarks vs RoPE
  • 40% less performance degradation when scaling from 1K to 8K context

5. 2025 Model Architecture Comparison

Feature DeepSeek-V3 Llama 4 Gemma 3 Qwen3-235B SmolLM3
Total Params 671B 405B 27B 235B 3B
Active Params 37B 17B 27B 22B 3B
Attention MLA GQA GQA + Window GQA MHA
Position Encoding RoPE RoPE RoPE RoPE Partial NoPE
Normalization Pre-Norm Pre-Norm Hybrid Pre-Norm Pre-Norm
Key Innovation MoE + Shared Alternating MoE Sliding Window MoE Lightweight

6. Technical Insights: Answering Key Questions

Q1: How do MoE models achieve massive scale without proportional compute costs?

DeepSeek-V3 Example:

  • 67.1B total parameters
  • Only 9 experts active per token (8 routed + 1 shared)
  • 3.7B parameters actually computed
    Like consulting 9 specialists from a 256-expert pool per query

Q2: Does sliding window attention compromise model quality?

Gemma 3 Validation:

Configuration Perplexity (↓) Memory Usage
Full Global Attention 2.31 100%
Sliding Window (1024) 2.33 60%
<1% quality impact for 40% memory savings

Q3: Why does OLMo 2 retain traditional Multi-Head Attention?

Technical report states:
“GQA offers diminishing returns below 20B parameters, and MHA demonstrates superior fine-tuning stability”
Note: OLMo’s later 32B variant adopted GQA

The Future of LLM Architectures

The 2025 architectural innovations reveal two core objectives driving advancement:

  1. Memory Efficiency – Overcoming hardware limitations through MLA, sliding windows, and KV compression
  2. Computational Sparsity – MoE enabling trillion-parameter models with billion-parameter compute

As observed in DeepSeek’s technical documentation:

“Rather than pursuing architectural revolution, we optimize each Transformer component—each 0.1% loss reduction and 1% memory saving compounds into generational leaps”

For detailed hyperparameters: Original Technical Report

Exit mobile version