My impression was rather that CUDA is successful because it will work on any NVidia GPU that's not yet old enough to vote, which means a number of things: - pe

My impression was rather that CUDA is successful because it will work on any NVidia GPU that's not yet old enough to vote, which means a number of things: - people had lots of time to get used to it - hobbyists and smaller research outfits/labs could make use of it on the cheap and less powerful hardware (where even a cheap GPGPU beats computing in software), driving: - mind share (compare: Photoshop/Microsoft's tolerance to piracy) - sales of hardware when the users decided to upgrade, buying more and/or and/or more modern and/or better cards - the longer it has been available, the more stable of a programming target it appears to be, driving a virtuous cycle In contrast, the range of AMD hardware supporting ROCm was narrow and unstable (AFAIK one card was only supported for a couple of years). This would of course make ROCm unattractive for building with, especially for the hobbyists and smaller outfits that would otherwise drive mindshare but couldn't afford datacenter grade hardware that was supported.