3 ms·
I think this was a more accurate assessment a couple of years ago. AMD historically under invested in their software stack, as is well documented. But, they are
by vessenes 3y ago
I think this was a more accurate assessment a couple of years ago. AMD historically under invested in their software stack, as is well documented. But, they are catching up. The prevalence of pytorch makes it easier for hardware vendors to target a single set of libraries for implementation and get broad distribution. Even Apple has made major progress getting mps support in more broadly, first directly into pytorch, and they are now charting their own course with MPX with some early interesting successes. Zuck recently used the word "H100 equivalent" in compute, and my memory is he indicated roughly 35% of that compute was not from NVIDIA -- that will all be AMD.
There's still work to do -- lots of repositories still contain `if device=="cuda"` type language, but my own experience is that manging code around to use apple gpus has gotten vastly easier this year, and I see more and more AMD GPU owners floating around github issues with resolvable problems. A year ago they were barely present.
All that said - people aren't ignoring it - and entrepreneurs and cloud monopolies are putting real resources into opening things up. I think the playing field will continue to level / get back to competitive over the next two to three years.
- ShamelessC 3y agoThe main issue is until you solve 99% of all the problems, you’re still introducing substantial friction to every potential user who may have had to go from zero coding knowledge needed to very specialized coding knowledge needed. And while many problems are trivial to fix at eg the PyTorch layer, lots of stuff like flash attention, DeepSpeed, etc. are coded directly in CUDA kernels.