Edge / local inference engines (Aug 2026)

A cluster of projects unlocking huge models on tiny hardware. Shared technique: exploit MoE
sparsity โ€” keep the small shared core resident in RAM, stream routed expert weights from disk on
demand โ€” rather than quantizing the whole model.

The pattern

MoE models have a small active-per-token parameter count and a large mostly-idle expert set.
Streaming those experts from SSD/NVMe (with an LRU/LFU cache) turns multi-trillion-parameter models
into consumer-hardware workloads. "Zero quantization, zero distillation" is the common boast.

Projects

Memory-management comparison

Two distinct strategies are hiding under the shared "MoE sparsity" label. Worth keeping separate โ€”
they optimize for different constraints and fail differently.

A. Stream-and-cache (kimi-k3-in-c, TurboFieldfare, h3.c --ssd-streaming) โ€” keep the shared
core resident, stream routed experts from SSD/NVMe on demand, and cache the hot experts. Memory
footprint stays flat no matter how many experts exist; the cost is a cache miss on the first token
after a routing change.

B. Shrink the active set (Ling-3.0-tiny) โ€” make the active per-token footprint so small
(1.3B of 7.9B, KDA:MLA 3:1 hybrid attention) that the whole thing fits in RAM; no disk streaming
at all. Optimizes for latency and deterministic first-token time (<100ms) rather than total
parameter count.

The reusable insight: the engine choice is a trade between scale (A streams arbitrarily many
experts, but pays cache misses) and latency (B never misses, but is capped by what fits in RAM).
The cache policy (LRU vs LFU, per-layer vs global) is the tunable that separates the A-strategy
engines. Watch for the two strategies to merge โ€” a small-resident-core model that also streams
overflow experts on larger hardware.