5 ms·

This event of release is however a result of AMD stopped funding it per "After two years of development and some deliberation, AMD decided that there is no busi

This event of release is however a result of AMD stopped funding it per "After two years of development and some deliberation, AMD decided that there is no business case for running CUDA applications on AMD GPUs. One of the terms of my contract with AMD was that if AMD did not find it fit for further development, I could release it. Which brings us to today." from https://github.com/vosen/ZLUDA?tab=readme-ov-file#faq https://github.com/vosen/ZLUDA?tab=readme-ov-file#faq so, same mistake intel made before.

VoxPelli 3y ago
Sounds like he had a good contract, would be great to read more about that, hopefully more devs could include the same phrasing!
nikanj 3y ago
This should be the top comment here, people are getting their hopes up for nothing
CuriousCosmic 3y ago
I mean it could also be that there was no business case for it as long as it remained closed source work. If the now very clearly well functioning implementation continues to perform as well as it is, the community may be able to keep it funded and functioning. And the other side of this is that with renewed AMD interest/support for the rocm/HIP project, it might be just good enough as a stopgap step to push projects towards rocm/HIP adoption. (included below is another blurb from the readme). > I am a developer writing CUDA code, does this project help me port my code to ROCm/HIP? > Currently no, this project is strictly for end users. However this project could be used for a much more gradual porting from CUDA to HIP than anything else. You could start with an unmodified application running on ZLUDA, then have ZLUDA expose the underlying HIP objects (streams, modules, etc.), allowing to rewrite GPU kernels one at a time. Or you could have a mixed CUDA-HIP application where only the most performance sensitive GPU kernels are written in the native AMD language.
pk-protect-ai 3y ago
> After two years of development and some deliberation, AMD decided that there is no business case for running CUDA applications on AMD GPUs Who was responsible at AMD for this project and why is he still not fired???????? How brain dead someone have to be to reject the major market share??????
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
tgsovlerkhgsel 3y ago
How is this not priority #1 for them, with NVIDIA stock shooting to the moon because everyone does machine learning using CUDA-centric tools? If AMD could get 90% of the CUDA ML stuff to seamlessly run on AMD hardware, and could provide hardware at a competitive cost-per-performance (which I assume they probably could since NVIDIA must have an insane profit margin on their GPUs), wouldn't that be the opportunity to eat NVIDIA's lunch?
- make3 3y ago
  it's a common misconception that deep learning stuff is built in cuda. it's actually built on CUDNN kernels that don't use cuda but are actually gpu assembly written by hand by phds. I'm really not convinced that this project here would be able to be used for this. the ROCm kernels that are analogue to cudnn though, yes
  - abbra 3y ago
    This project relies on ROCm for all it's CUDNN magic.
- pheatherlite 3y ago
  The only reason our lab bought 20k worth of Nvidia gpu cards rather than amd was the cuda industry standard (might as wellbe). It's kind of mind boggling how much business amd must be losing over this.
  - Rafuino 3y ago
    So, your lab bought ~1 GPU?
    - polygamous_bat 3y ago
      Hey stop shaming the GPU poor, not everyone is Mark Zuckerberg ordering $8bn. of GPUs.
    - paulmd 3y ago
RachelF 3y ago
Yeah, AMD look like idiots for doing this. Either they are very stupid, or open sourcing the library stops NVidia from suing them in a repeat of the Oracle/Google lawsuit over Java APIs? I'm not sure what the reason is?
- bitbang 3y ago
  That was my immediate thought: the software is made publicity available to help add value to their product offering, but they plausable deniability in court and don't have to bear the burden of potential lawsuits or support.
- yen223 3y ago
  I think AMD is focusing on the "inference" side of ML, which doesn't really require CUDA or similar, and is what they believe a much larger market. Time will tell if that strategy is going to pan out. Ceding the ML "training" market entirely to Nvidia is certainly a bold move
theropost 3y ago
Perhaps AMD realizes that if they released something like this in a formal capacity, they might face a barrage of lawsuits, and IP claims from Nvidia. If this is completed through an Open Source project however, in which AMD is not directly funding, Nvidia would not have many legal avenues to attack. Just an opinion.

VoxPelli 3y ago

Sounds like he had a good contract, would be great to read more about that, hopefully more devs could include the same phrasing!

nikanj 3y ago

This should be the top comment here, people are getting their hopes up for nothing

CuriousCosmic 3y ago

I mean it could also be that there was no business case for it as long as it remained closed source work. If the now very clearly well functioning implementation continues to perform as well as it is, the community may be able to keep it funded and functioning. And the other side of this is that with renewed AMD interest/support for the rocm/HIP project, it might be just good enough as a stopgap step to push projects towards rocm/HIP adoption. (included below is another blurb from the readme). > I am a developer writing CUDA code, does this project help me port my code to ROCm/HIP? > Currently no, this project is strictly for end users. However this project could be used for a much more gradual porting from CUDA to HIP than anything else. You could start with an unmodified application running on ZLUDA, then have ZLUDA expose the underlying HIP objects (streams, modules, etc.), allowing to rewrite GPU kernels one at a time. Or you could have a mixed CUDA-HIP application where only the most performance sensitive GPU kernels are written in the native AMD language.

pk-protect-ai 3y ago

> After two years of development and some deliberation, AMD decided that there is no business case for running CUDA applications on AMD GPUs Who was responsible at AMD for this project and why is he still not fired???????? How brain dead someone have to be to reject the major market share??????

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

tgsovlerkhgsel 3y ago

How is this not priority #1 for them, with NVIDIA stock shooting to the moon because everyone does machine learning using CUDA-centric tools? If AMD could get 90% of the CUDA ML stuff to seamlessly run on AMD hardware, and could provide hardware at a competitive cost-per-performance (which I assume they probably could since NVIDIA must have an insane profit margin on their GPUs), wouldn't that be the opportunity to eat NVIDIA's lunch?

make3 3y ago
it's a common misconception that deep learning stuff is built in cuda. it's actually built on CUDNN kernels that don't use cuda but are actually gpu assembly written by hand by phds. I'm really not convinced that this project here would be able to be used for this. the ROCm kernels that are analogue to cudnn though, yes
- abbra 3y ago
  This project relies on ROCm for all it's CUDNN magic.
pheatherlite 3y ago
The only reason our lab bought 20k worth of Nvidia gpu cards rather than amd was the cuda industry standard (might as wellbe). It's kind of mind boggling how much business amd must be losing over this.
- Rafuino 3y ago
  So, your lab bought ~1 GPU?
  - polygamous_bat 3y ago
    Hey stop shaming the GPU poor, not everyone is Mark Zuckerberg ordering $8bn. of GPUs.
  - paulmd 3y ago

RachelF 3y ago

Yeah, AMD look like idiots for doing this. Either they are very stupid, or open sourcing the library stops NVidia from suing them in a repeat of the Oracle/Google lawsuit over Java APIs? I'm not sure what the reason is?

bitbang 3y ago
That was my immediate thought: the software is made publicity available to help add value to their product offering, but they plausable deniability in court and don't have to bear the burden of potential lawsuits or support.
yen223 3y ago
I think AMD is focusing on the "inference" side of ML, which doesn't really require CUDA or similar, and is what they believe a much larger market. Time will tell if that strategy is going to pan out. Ceding the ML "training" market entirely to Nvidia is certainly a bold move

theropost 3y ago

Perhaps AMD realizes that if they released something like this in a formal capacity, they might face a barrage of lawsuits, and IP claims from Nvidia. If this is completed through an Open Source project however, in which AMD is not directly funding, Nvidia would not have many legal avenues to attack. Just an opinion.