4 ms·
The supported ROCm version is 4.0 which only the latest AMD instinct supports it. There's still a long way before its supported in the latest consumer RDNA 2 GP
by blackcat201 6y ago
The supported ROCm version is 4.0 which only the latest AMD instinct supports it. There's still a long way before its supported in the latest consumer RDNA 2 GPUs ( RX 6000 series )
- porphyra 6y agoLack of ROCm support in consumer RDNA 2 GPUs really makes it impossible for regular people to use ROCm. As an owner of an AMD Radeon RX 6800 I'm pretty salty about it.
- krastanov 6y agoI am getting some conflicting messages about support. There is a small group of people working on ROCm for Julia (in AMDGPU.jl) and while that work is still alpha quality, they seem to expect even devices as old as RX 580 to work. Are all of these support issues something that is on the ROCm/AMD/driver side, or are they on the side of libraries like pytorch?
- snovv_crash 6y agoRX580 had a pro version which got ROCm support. It's the newer cards and older cards which aren't supported.
- dnautics 6y agoCan confirm, I made an 8x rx580 rig for an r&d project specifically for that reason.
- my123 6y agoRX580 is out of support for ROCm nowadays, which only supports Vega and Instinct now. https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/1353#issuecomment-753772733 https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/1353#issuec...
- jpsamaroo 6y agoThis is an issue with AMD not wanting to long-term support the code paths in ROCm components necessary to enable ROCm on these devices. My hope is that Polaris GPU owners will step up to the plate and contribute patches to ROCm components to ensure that their cards keep working, when AMD is unwilling to do the leg work themselves (which is fair, they aren't nearly as big or rich as NVidia).
- Dylan16807 6y agoAt least they promised support. They're actively refusing to comment on 5000-series.
- jiehong 6y agoIndeed. Yet, the amdgpu-pro driver supports the 5000 series. I managed to get it to work for my 5500 XT, but only in Ubuntu and for the 5.4 kernel and it wasn’t straightforward. It would be nice if a project like Mesa would exist for OpenCL. In the future, I suppose Vulkan will be used instead for compute though.
- cranium 6y agoIt's the last thing that keeps me on Nvidia with proprietary Linux drivers. I wouldn't mind ML training on a AMD card to be slower but I need my workload to be at least GPU-accelerated.
- carlmr 6y agoI mean I wouldn't worry too much about it, I think if something big like PyTorch supports it AMD might rethink their strategy here. They have a lot to gain by entering the compute market.
- meragrin_ 6y agoAMD only cares about data center. Anything below that, they don't care. They don't care about supporting anything other than linux. God forbid some person try to experiment with their hardware/software as a hobby before putting it to use in a work setting.
- carlmr 6y agoEh, not sure if that's correct. Their Ryzen consumer CPUs work amazingly well on Windows. The gaming graphics cards also still target Windows. And if they do care about the data center that much and ROCm becomes a thing for compute, they will want as many people as possible to be able to experiment with ROCm at home. So that they demand data centers with ROCm.
- sorenjan 6y agoROCm has been a thing for four years now, Cuda had been around almost a decade before ROCm was conceived, and AMD still doesn't show any interest in an accessible compute platform for all developers and users. I think they should focus on OpenCL and Sycl.
- carlmr 6y agoWell it's a chicken and egg problem. Without major library support nobody cares about ROCm, if nobody cares about ROCm AMD management will focus on other things. But PyTorch just laid that egg.