3 ms·
A decade ago, CUDA was still offering a more usable platform than the competition. The problem could only have been averted if AMD had properly committed to inv
by dotnet00 3y ago
A decade ago, CUDA was still offering a more usable platform than the competition. The problem could only have been averted if AMD had properly committed to investing in their platform at least decade ago, just as NVIDIA has been doing for almost 2 decades now.
- whatshisface 3y agoA decade ago, CUDA was better, but I don't think the industry had crossed the threshold of being stuck on it. AMD still had the option of investing to catch up, and there would have been the possibility of an industry consortium. Now, with the whole ML stack having been optimized over ten years of rapid development for a single proprietary standard, and especially with the deliberate obstructionism exemplified by the linked article, it is much less likely that a consortium or competitor could catch up.
- TeMPOraL 3y agoA decade ago we still called it GPGPU and it was a somewhat niche stuff used for specialized applications. There wasn't enough interest in the field to warrant that heavy investment. Fast-forward ten years, and we're in rapid inflation phase (the cosmological kind, not the financial kind) - whatever choices were there at the start got baked in, and are sinks for all the free money that's coming in and demanding fast results. AMD could've solved this 10 years ago if they invested in it, but they didn't have future knowledge about ML on GPUs being the next big thing.