3 ms·
Well in that particular case they became dominant in the gpgpu space because they had a vastly superior offering ( cuda ), which they then capitalized on, while
by Agingcoder 3y ago
Well in that particular case they became dominant in the gpgpu space because they had a vastly superior offering ( cuda ), which they then capitalized on, while their competitors produced inferior products. I read my first gpgpu papers around 2005 I think , but the one company that ran with it was Nvidia. I don’t see this as luck.
Once you are dominant though, you can stay that way for a long time.
- A4ET8a8uTh0 3y agoWe disagree, but that is ok. I am admittedly a little biased against nvidia. FWIW, your arguments are good. I think here it is a matter of perspective on what constitutes luck.
- Agingcoder 3y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrookGPU?wprov=sfti1# https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrookGPU?wprov=sfti1# If you’re interested in the early gpgpu work, which interestingly enough worked both on Ati( now amd ) and nvidia hardware. I agree to disagree :-)