6 ms·
Nvidia GPUs only.
by Narishma 5y ago
Nvidia GPUs only.
- xwdv 5y agoWho else is there… AMD?
- keymone 5y agoYes?
- xwdv 5y agoNVDA is 82% of the market and rising.
- dijit 5y agoAre we celebrating monopolies now?
- 411111111111111 5y agothe difference between current AMD and Nvidia GPUs isn't even that large if viewed from price/performance ratio... Comparing cards at similar price has AMD having slightly less performance while having significantly more GDDR memory. i still use an RTX3080 though, thankfully got one before the current craze started
- kadoban 5y agoThe difference between AMD and Nvidia is _huge_ when you look at software support and drivers and etc. Part of this is network effects and part of it is just AMD itself. But the hard reality is I'd never buy AMD for compute, even if in specs it were better. Just as a random anecdote, I grabbed an AMD 5700xt around when those came out (for gaming). Since I had it sitting around between gaming sessions, I figured I'd try to use it for some compute, for Go AI training. For _1.5 years_ there existed a showstopping bug with this, it just could not function for all of that time. They _still_ do not support this card in their ROCm library platform last I checked. The focus and support from AMD is just not there.
- croes 5y agoActually they lost 1% and are now at 81%
- tormeh 5y agoAlso Intel. Being Nvidia-only is not very good from an accessibility point-of-view. It means that only ML researchers and about 60% of gamers can run this.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Cthulhu_ 5y agoThankfully it's a specialist software package not aimed at gamers or ML researchers.
- pjmlp 5y agoAnd most people in Hollywood using rendering engines like Optix.
- CyberDildonics 5y agoNo they don't. Also optix isn't a renderer, it just traces rays and runs shaders on the ray hits on nvidia cards. Memory limitations and immature renderers hinder gpu rendering. The makers of gpu renderers want you to think it's what most companies use, but it is not. Also Hollywood is a city and most computer animation is not done there. The big movie studios aren't even in Hollywood except for paramount.
- pjmlp 5y agoExcept that is what companies like OTOY happen to build their products on. https://home.otoy.com/render/octane-render/ https://home.otoy.com/render/octane-render/ As for the rest of the comment, usual Nvidia hate.
- CyberDildonics 5y agoOctane is exactly the type of thing I'm talking about. This is not what film is rendered with. It is mostly combinations of PRman, Arnold or proprietary renderers, all software. I don't know where you are getting "nvidia hate", studios that use linux usually use nvidia, mostly because of the drivers. None of this changes that optix is not a renderer.
- bruce343434 5y agoAMD, and Intel, yeah.
- keymone 5y agoAMD, Intel, Apple, Samsung and all the other mobile chip makers.
- hyperluz 5y agoWhat would be the best alternative? OpenCL? Vulkan?
- raphlinus 5y agoOpenCL is sadly stagnant. Vulkan is a good choice but not itself portable. There are frameworks such as wgpu that run compute shaders (among other things) portably across a range of GPU hardware.
- ColonelPhantom 5y agoIn what way is Vulkan not portable? It runs on all operating systems (Windows 7+, Linux, Android, and Apple via MoltenVK) and all GPUs (AMD GCN, nVidia Kepler, Intel), and shaders (compute and rendering) are to my knowledge standardized in the portable SPIR-V bytecode. WGPU is more portable, since it can use not only Vulkan but also other APIs like OpenGL and Direct3D 11, but Vulkan is already very highly portable for almost everyone with a computer modern enough to run anything related to GPU compute.
- raphlinus 5y agoIt's kinda portable, but I've had not-great experiences with MoltenVK - piet-gpu doesn't work on it, for reasons I haven't dug into. It may be practical for some people to write Vulkan-only code.
- PixelOfDeath 5y agoYou basically complain about Vulkan not being portable enough because Apple made their ownTM Vulken-like API instead of actually supporting Vulkan. And some other people made a subset of Vulkan working on top of that. Why don't you complain about Apple not supporting Vulkan instead?
- p1necone 5y agoVulkan is supported on basically all modern platforms except for Apple operating systems, Apple refuses to support open graphics APIs on their platform and there's nothing anyone can do about it - this isn't a Vulkan problem. Even OpenGL is deprecated and support hasn't been updated for years, and that's basically the most open graphics API in existence.
- TuringNYC 5y agoI've written a lot of software against GPUs, albiet some years back. The main challenge was that many of the best libraries had CUDA support (or CuDNN support on top) but not support for other GPU lines' frameworks. Getting CUDA to work well is hard. Not hard on your laptop, not hard on a particular machine but hard to work everywhere when you dont know the target environment beforehand -- there are different OSs, different OS versions, different versions of CUDA, different cards with different capabilities. But we did get it to work fairly widely across client machines. The same effort needs to be put into getting things to work for other manufacturers, except a layer deeper since now you're not even standardized on CUDA. Many companies just dont make the investment. Our startup didn't, because we wouldn't find people who could make it work cost effectively. What I really wish is that the other manufacturers would themselves test popular frameworks against a matrix of cards under different operating systems and versions. We see some of that, for example, with the effort of getting TensorFlow to run on Apple's m1 and metal. I just dont see a random startup (e.g., mine w/ 12 employees) being able to achieve this. For example, if I know from the manufacturer that I could get TensorFlow X to work on GPU Y on {Centos N, Ubuntu 18/20}, I would gladly expand support to those GPUs. But sometimes you dont know if it is even possible and you spin your wheels for days or weeks -- and if the marketshare for the card is limited, the business justification for the effort is hard to make. The manufacturers can address this issue.
- hhh 5y agoWhy not use the Nvidia docker runtime and put your application in a container?
- HelloNurse 5y agoCan you download a RTX 3080 from the Docker registry?
- analognoise 5y agoThe hardware is a hell of a lot cheaper than wasting a week of engineering time though isn't it?
- raphlinus 5y agoA simple artifical life / cellular automaton framework would be a great demo for portable compute shaders. I'm looking at this as a potential starting point in my compute-shader-101 project. If someone is interested in coding something up, please get in touch.
- nynx 5y agoI'd love to help with this. I've been experimenting with rustgpu + wgpu, so I'd personally go there first probably.
- raphlinus 5y agoYeah, that looks like probably the most promising stack for the future, but there are certainly rough edges today. See [8] for a possible starting point (a pull into that repo or a link to your own would both be fine here). [8] https://github.com/googlefonts/compute-shader-101/pull/8 https://github.com/googlefonts/compute-shader-101/pull/8
- goldenkey 5y agohttps://github.com/churchofthought/Grautamaton https://github.com/churchofthought/Grautamaton
- UncleOxidant 5y agoAnd Windows 10 only :(