3 ms·
Also, while AMD's OpenCL implementation has more features on paper, the runtime is frequently broken where NVIDIA's claimed features actually all work. Everyth
by paulmd 3y ago
Also, while AMD's OpenCL implementation has more features on paper, the runtime is frequently broken where NVIDIA's claimed features actually all work. Everything I've heard from people who've used it is that they ended up with so much vendor-specific code to patch around AMD's bugs and deficiencies that they might as well have just written CUDA in the first place.
This is an old article but the old "vendor B" stuff still rings incredibly true with at least AMD's OpenCL stack as well.
https://richg42.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-truth-on-opengl-driver-quality.html https://richg42.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-truth-on-opengl-dri...
Thus NVIDIA actually has even less of a lock-in than people think. If you want to write a better OneAPI ecosystem and run it on OpenCL runtime... go hog wild! NVIDIA is best at that too! You just don't get the benefit of NVIDIA's engineers writing libraries for you.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- paulmd 3y agobtw as far as anyone insisting "ROCm is good now"... see a practical example in action. https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/2198#issuecomment-1574383483 https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/issues/2198#issuec...