5 ms·
AMD vs NVidia novice here. My untested understanding has been that even though AMD is performance-to-dollar higher performance than nVidia, it is plagued by no
by kopos 9y ago
AMD vs NVidia novice here.
My untested understanding has been that even though AMD is performance-to-dollar higher performance than nVidia, it is plagued by not having a stellar software support that nVidia enjoys either via CUDA and consequently to cudaNN, software drivers not as fully compatible with games as is nVidia. AMD has OpenCL but I understand that most vendors / users are not exactly great supporters for OpenCL.
Since the hardware is just the trojan for software and nVidia has solved that problem, will not having the s/w support be a great factor for AMD not getting the same value as nVidia? Unless AMD puts in great effort to get its software game as good as its hardware, is it still DoA?
- nhaehnle 9y ago(Disclaimer: I work on AMD's Mesa driver) There's also ROCm, which is AMD's attempt at an answer to CUDA. It's hard to unseat the incumbent just because it's always hard to get people to change their software environment, but I think we're getting there.
- kopos 9y agoThank you. This is the first time I heard about ROCm. I sincerely wish that ROCm adoption takes off - been a AMD / ATI fanboy - so have been wanting to see AMD make a great dent. Any numbers / etc to get more info on adoption of ROCm? Are there any specific usecases where ROCm well suited / performs on par / or above par cuda?