3 ms·

Another tip that took me longer than I wished to figure out. Use CUDA, vice graphics APIs+compute. The latter (Vulkan compute etc) is high friction. CUDA is fa

Another tip that took me longer than I wished to figure out. Use CUDA, vice graphics APIs+compute. The latter (Vulkan compute etc) is high friction. CUDA is far easier to write in, and the resulting code is easier to maintain and update.

behnamoh 3y ago
Yes, and in the process, contribute to Nvidia’s monopoly.
- bogwog 3y ago
  It isn't the consumer's responsibility to regulate the market.
  - danielmarkbruce 3y ago
    And, in this case NVIDIA earned it. They built a very useful software layer around their chips.
  - dzikimarian 3y ago
    If consumers don't care about their money, then who would?
  - calamari4065 3y ago
    Then whose responsibility is it? Corporations? The government? Or maybe the tooth fairy?
  - tjoff 3y ago
    That is a weak argument that could be used to justify tons of behavior, very convenient. Vote with your feet. Maybe you can't or can't afford it, then at least admit the problem to yourself and maybe don't try to persuade others in order to feel better for your own decision.
- tovej 3y ago
  Eh, CUDA can mostly be transformed to HIP, unless you use specialized NVIDIA stuff.
- the__alchemist 3y ago
  I'm with you, and am surprised there isn't comparable competition.
- raincole 3y ago
  Very few professional artists refuse using Photoshop or After Effects because it will "contribute to Adobe's monopoly". But for some reasons professional programmers are judged under a much higher moral standard.
  - ickelbawd 3y ago
    I think because professional artists can’t typically make their software tools. Whereas engineers could in theory make their own tools. Naturally few do in practice though as tech has become far too large and specialized. But our roots are where our values and ideals come from.
    - hutzlibu 3y ago
      That is a really theoretical point. If I start to work on a tool, then I cannot work anymore on what I actually wanted to do. And it just so happens ... that this is exactly what I did and I can just say, it usually takes way longer than the most pessimistic estimate one can come up with, so yes, one can decide to switch careers and try to get funding to (re)build what is not offered to acceptable conditions (but in my case the tool simply did not exist, though). Just like an artist can switch career, study CS, build on his own a tool a professional company build with a team over years - and then someday work with his tool to acomplish his original work. In (simplified) theories, lots of things are possible ..
  - Aurornis 3y ago
    > But for some reasons professional programmers are judged under a much higher moral standard Not in the real world. Most programmers who are trying to get a job done won’t avoid CUDA or AWS or other tools just to avoid “contributing to a monopoly”. When responsible programmers have a job to do and tools are available to help with the job, they get used. A programmer who avoids mainstream tools on principle is liable to get surpassed by their peers very quickly. I’ve only met a few people like this in industry and they didn’t last very long trying to do everything the hard way just to avoid tools from corporations or monopolies or open source that wasn’t pure enough for their standards. It’s only really in internet comment sections that people push ideological purity like this.
- gjsman-1000 3y ago
  So sayeth the person who has never written OpenCL.
- ilaksh 3y ago
  Is there something that is not vendor specific? Maybe a parallel programming language that compiles to different targets? ..and doesn't suck.
  - atq2119 3y ago
    The part that I don't understand is why AMD/Intel/somebody else don't just implement at least the base CUDA for their products. HIP is basically that, but they still make you jump through hoops to rename everything etc. There are libraries written at a lower level that wouldn't be immediately portable, but surely that could be addressed over time as well.
nwoli 3y ago
I agree cuda is really nice to write in, but what reason do you have to write raw cuda I’m curious? Usually I find that it’s pre written kernels you deal with
- the__alchemist 3y ago
  Currently doing computational chemistry, but per the article, it's a fundamental part of my toolkit going forward; I think it will be a useful tool for many applications.
drdrey 3y ago
What about on macOS? Is OpenCL viable?
dinosaurdynasty 3y ago
I wish someone would make the latter much easier, as someone who is definitely not the only person to get interested in this AI stuff lately who has a high tier AMD card that could surely do this stuff and would like to run this stuff locally for various reasons. Currently I've given up and use runpod, but still...

behnamoh 3y ago

Yes, and in the process, contribute to Nvidia’s monopoly.

bogwog 3y ago
It isn't the consumer's responsibility to regulate the market.
- danielmarkbruce 3y ago
  And, in this case NVIDIA earned it. They built a very useful software layer around their chips.
- dzikimarian 3y ago
  If consumers don't care about their money, then who would?
- calamari4065 3y ago
  Then whose responsibility is it? Corporations? The government? Or maybe the tooth fairy?
- tjoff 3y ago
  That is a weak argument that could be used to justify tons of behavior, very convenient. Vote with your feet. Maybe you can't or can't afford it, then at least admit the problem to yourself and maybe don't try to persuade others in order to feel better for your own decision.
tovej 3y ago
Eh, CUDA can mostly be transformed to HIP, unless you use specialized NVIDIA stuff.
the__alchemist 3y ago
I'm with you, and am surprised there isn't comparable competition.
raincole 3y ago
Very few professional artists refuse using Photoshop or After Effects because it will "contribute to Adobe's monopoly". But for some reasons professional programmers are judged under a much higher moral standard.
- ickelbawd 3y ago
  I think because professional artists can’t typically make their software tools. Whereas engineers could in theory make their own tools. Naturally few do in practice though as tech has become far too large and specialized. But our roots are where our values and ideals come from.
  - hutzlibu 3y ago
    That is a really theoretical point. If I start to work on a tool, then I cannot work anymore on what I actually wanted to do. And it just so happens ... that this is exactly what I did and I can just say, it usually takes way longer than the most pessimistic estimate one can come up with, so yes, one can decide to switch careers and try to get funding to (re)build what is not offered to acceptable conditions (but in my case the tool simply did not exist, though). Just like an artist can switch career, study CS, build on his own a tool a professional company build with a team over years - and then someday work with his tool to acomplish his original work. In (simplified) theories, lots of things are possible ..
- Aurornis 3y ago
  > But for some reasons professional programmers are judged under a much higher moral standard Not in the real world. Most programmers who are trying to get a job done won’t avoid CUDA or AWS or other tools just to avoid “contributing to a monopoly”. When responsible programmers have a job to do and tools are available to help with the job, they get used. A programmer who avoids mainstream tools on principle is liable to get surpassed by their peers very quickly. I’ve only met a few people like this in industry and they didn’t last very long trying to do everything the hard way just to avoid tools from corporations or monopolies or open source that wasn’t pure enough for their standards. It’s only really in internet comment sections that people push ideological purity like this.
gjsman-1000 3y ago
So sayeth the person who has never written OpenCL.
ilaksh 3y ago
Is there something that is not vendor specific? Maybe a parallel programming language that compiles to different targets? ..and doesn't suck.
- atq2119 3y ago
  The part that I don't understand is why AMD/Intel/somebody else don't just implement at least the base CUDA for their products. HIP is basically that, but they still make you jump through hoops to rename everything etc. There are libraries written at a lower level that wouldn't be immediately portable, but surely that could be addressed over time as well.

nwoli 3y ago

I agree cuda is really nice to write in, but what reason do you have to write raw cuda I’m curious? Usually I find that it’s pre written kernels you deal with

the__alchemist 3y ago
Currently doing computational chemistry, but per the article, it's a fundamental part of my toolkit going forward; I think it will be a useful tool for many applications.

drdrey 3y ago

What about on macOS? Is OpenCL viable?

dinosaurdynasty 3y ago

I wish someone would make the latter much easier, as someone who is definitely not the only person to get interested in this AI stuff lately who has a high tier AMD card that could surely do this stuff and would like to run this stuff locally for various reasons. Currently I've given up and use runpod, but still...