3 ms·
Seems like yet another CUDA alternative. Thing is, even if you were wanting to move away from CUDA, the churn of the alternative models would be scary. Do you w
by RcouF1uZ4gsC 6y ago
Seems like yet another CUDA alternative. Thing is, even if you were wanting to move away from CUDA, the churn of the alternative models would be scary. Do you want to develop for CUDA which has been stable and developed for quite some time, or do you want to try a new standard that you don’t known if it will be obsolete in a couple of years?
- BadInformatics 6y ago> do you want to try a new standard that you don’t known if it will be obsolete in a couple of years Some incarnation of oneAPI is bound to exist as long as Intel has a foothold in the HPC market. For example, MKL and MKL-DNN have been rebranded with a oneAPI prefix. So no, the long term stability argument doesn't hold water. I'd also note that they appear to have added support for cuBLAS and cuDNN as backends in their respective oneAPI libraries. It would be hilarious if that lead to more people running oneAPI on non-Intel hardware than first party stuff.
- jcelerier 6y agootoh Intel has over the years developed a few parallel libraries / extensions that have then been deprecated, for instance Cilk Plus...
- gbrown_ 6y ago> Seems like yet another CUDA alternative. How many real alternatives are there though aside from OpenCL? Not to mention if you're interested in targeting something that isn't an Nvidia GPU.