3 ms·
As a long time user of intels scientific compiler/accelerator stack, I'm not sure if I'd call it a "good track record". Once you get all their libs working they
by eyegor 3y ago
As a long time user of intels scientific compiler/accelerator stack, I'm not sure if I'd call it a "good track record". Once you get all their libs working they tend to be fairly well optimized but they're always a huge hassle to install, configure, and distribute. And when I say a hassle to install, I'm talking about hours to run their installers.
They have a track record of taking open projects, adding proprietary extensions, and then requiring those extensions to work with other tools. This sounds fine, but they are very slow/never update the base libs. From version to version they'll muck with deep dependencies, sometimes they'll even ship different rules on different platforms (I dare you to try to static link openmp in a recent version of oneapi targeting windows). If you ship a few tools (let's say A and B) that use the same dynamic lib, it's a royal pain to make sure they don't conflict with each other if you update software A but not B. Ranting about consumer junk aside, their cluster focused tooling on Linux tends to be quite good, especially compared to amd.