5 ms·
> AMD still doesn't have a good answer to CUDA. I don't understand why AMD doesn't just jump on the CUDA bandwagon and support the API?
by discardorama 10y ago
> AMD still doesn't have a good answer to CUDA.
I don't understand why AMD doesn't just jump on the CUDA bandwagon and support the API?
- robbies 10y ago1. They have no say in the API so NV would just steer the API in ways to make sure it would be suboptimal on AMD hardware. 2. It's not just the API. It's the entire SDK that has NV specific hooks that AMD can't tap into
- saturncoleus 10y agoAlternatively they could make their own API, independent from OpenCL. I have written a small amount in each languages (a rainbow table generator), and found the CUDA version much more pleasant to use. CUDA made it really easy to get a good idea of the underlying hardware, and make architectural changes in order to make the code faster. OpenCL (using an ATI card) was much harder to program, since the abstraction level was much higher. Writing two separate kernels and have them each be faster than a generic version that ends up compromising for compatibility. The OpenCL one ended up being faster, but I suspect that's due to ATI hardware being superior at the time.
- maaku 10y agoThey do. They have a retargeting compiler. It's performance sucks.
- dharma1 10y agoThey are working on something like that - http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/218092-amds-boltzmann-initiative-targets-the-high-performance-computing-market http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/218092-amds-boltzmann-ini... The current versions only work with a couple of latest AMD chips though. And CUDA is just one part of it, they have nothing equivalent to CuDNN