3 ms·
Additionally, here's an example of how Caffe was porting using HIP [1]. To be honest, if the approach really does work, you might see a very quick increase in t
by slizard 10y ago
Additionally, here's an example of how Caffe was porting using HIP [1]. To be honest, if the approach really does work, you might see a very quick increase in the number of applications ported.
All in all, given how elegant HIP is and that HCC seems to make GPUs more approachable than CUDA (and less silly than OpenACC), there is a great potential for AMD to gain some traction. My greatest concern is the quality and robustness of their software stack, their overly optimistic view (at least from the outside), and their relationship with the rest of the OSS world, especially given the conflicts that they seems to be running into with upstream contrib [2].
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7AfQ730Zwc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I7AfQ730Zwc
[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13136426 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13136426
- jsheard 10y agoThe catch, which AMD are quick to gloss over, is that Caffes performance on Nvidia hardware largely comes from its use of Nvidia's proprietary cuDNN kernels. AMDs HIP port is using the "fallback" open-source CUDA kernels, which are nowhere near as fast as the hand-optimized cuDNN code.
- mikepavone 10y agoThings got a bit heated in the LKML thread, but if you read the more recent messages things have cooled down significantly. It's unclear whether they will ultimately be able to achieve all their goals while also getting the code into an upstreamable state, but they do seem committed to working out the issues with upstream.
- bryanlarsen 10y agoThat's a better relationship than nvidia's. https://www.wired.com/2012/06/torvalds-nvidia-linux/ https://www.wired.com/2012/06/torvalds-nvidia-linux/