4 ms·

> NVIDIA is one of the most open labs. Of course they are. They're commoditizing their complement. I want to own the hardware, not play around in an nvidia fi

> NVIDIA is one of the most open labs. Of course they are. They're commoditizing their complement. I want to own the hardware, not play around in an nvidia fiefdom full of nvidia rules.

bdangubic 2mo ago
nothing stopping you from doing that
- Forgeties79 2mo ago
  Are you joking? They just bought HF for $13bill and didn’t break a sweat. They are dominant and spreading.
- behringer 2mo ago
  Can't buy a decent modern Intel gpu to run AI on because of nividias "donation"
  - vee-kay 2mo ago
    [dead]
  - high_na_euv 2mo ago
    But Crescent Island is expected to appear soon
  - dannyw 2mo ago
    The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual has 48GB of VRAM; and the B70 goes up to 32GB.
    - mstkllah 2mo ago
      What is the support like for them? Can they be seriously considered as alternatives to Nvidia or AMD cards? I have been looking into buying a GPU, specifically the Radeon R9700 AI Pro but noticed the Intel cards too and was not sure what you make of them.
  - behringer 2mo ago
    I stand corrected. For some reason I had written off this generation but it does look capable.
bigyabai 2mo ago
You do own the hardware. Nvidia GPUs have FOSS driver alternatives (Nouveau, NOVA) and have supported OpenCL on the proprietary drivers since 2009. If you don't want to use CUDA, they expose the PTX bindings to write your own CUDA alternative too: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/parallel-thread-execution/index.html https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/parallel-thread-execution/index...
- bayindirh 2mo ago
  When last looked at it, NVIDIA was not supporting OpenCL beyond 1.0. Also, when running OpenCL, NVIDIA hardware disables multiple DMA engines, and allows only one memory transfer at a time to prevent OpenCL running as fast as CUDA. Did NVIDIA finally allow open source drivers to access all parts and features of the card to allow feature parity? Last time I checked they were considering a plan for planning a solution to that.
  - pjmlp 2mo ago
    People love to blame NVidia on OpenCL failure, maybe Intel and AMD should actually deliver something compute researchers want to use?
    - bayindirh 2mo ago
      I love your insights which enlighten my blind spots most of the time, but I didn't blame NVIDIA for OpenCL's failure. I just noted a company's choices when it comes to a competing set of libraries w.r.t. to their native ones. Having said that, I'll try compiling a OpenCL 3.0 program in the cluster, so I can report whether NVIDIA runs this software, and if yes, how well.
      - pjmlp 2mo ago
        Yeah, however if Intel and AMD actually delivered a working 2.0 with proper support for C++ and Fortran, maybe the OpenCL 3.0 back to 1.0 reboot would not have been needed. Likewise SYSCL although built on top of OpenCL 3.0 primitives, is mostly Intel, which also owns CodePlay, the company that delivered the first working SYSCL compute experience, again neither AMD nor Intel (until it bought CodePlay).
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
wjnc 2mo ago
I'll expand on the economics somewhat. My intuition is that you can like a moat left of you in the supply chain, but dislike moats to the right of you. (I'm using left and right as I picture this horizontally drawn. It is usually called vertical integration by economists.) But free competition in your market is worst of all. Free competition right outside your moat is pretty sweet, and that's were parent is commenting on. Nvidia probably likes that ASML is a monopolist (it's called a monopsony). The price is high and Nvidia can't scale as hard as they want to (more general: capital intensive market). This monopsony makes sure that other chip companies can't rapidly scale up and try to beat Nvidia. That there only ever was one other GPU firm (I'm prehistoric; once there were more) and they bungled it on software, is pretty sweet for Nvidia. On the side of their customers. It would be best for Nvidia if there is free competition for the outputs generated from there GPUs. This maximizes consumer surplus and thus demand. Maximum demand for tokens, is maximal demand feeded in their monopoly. If there is a monopoly right from you, demand is curtailed, and your value is limited. And that exactly is why you see interest from token generators for chips. Bridge that moat and gain a larger value surplus. Both NVidia and, say, China actively undercutting the token-supplier value chain is quite interesting to watch. It's like the Opium wars with us as somewhat happy customers. In this same vein, why isn't ASML raising thousands of billions for building their own (subsidiary) chip foundries, while raising prices and starving the market (a little) for their machines.
- patrickk 2mo ago
  > In this same vein, why isn't ASML raising thousands of billions for building their own (subsidiary) chip foundries, while raising prices and starving the market (a little) for their machines. You're looking this purely through an economic lens, while in reality geopolitical factors play a huge role in what ASML can and cannot do. The US government would likely take an extremely dim view of any new external competitor popping up for their chip foundry industry (especially with all the new US plants being built or planned) and would lean heavily on their vassal/ally the Netherlands to prevent this. Unlike with China, the US has more leverage over the Netherlands[1] The US security state and US tech giants are joined at the hip, as they have been since the beginning of Silicon Valley[1], right through the Snowden revelations through to the present day[2]. [1] https://nltimes.nl/2026/08/20/us-preparing-force-netherlands-ban-asml-selling-china https://nltimes.nl/2026/08/20/us-preparing-force-netherlands... [2] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/section-702-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-fisa-2026-resource-page https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/sect...
Iolaum 2mo ago
While nvidia 's drivers are closed source there's enough interest in running LLM's that you are not locked in using nvidia. Strix Halo chips have been around before dgx spark came out and deliver very similar performance.
amelius 2mo ago
> > NVIDIA is one of the most open labs. > Of course they are. They're commoditizing their complement Then why don't they sell consumer GPUs with tons of memory. They clearly segment the market into consumer versus server/business.
- HanClinto 2mo ago
  The upcoming RTX Spark [0] is aiming to fill that space -- consumer GPUs with tons of memory. [0] - https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/products/rtx-spark/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/products/rtx-spark/
  - SuchAnonMuchWow 2mo ago
    This is not a GPU, this is a laptop SoC with CPU and integrated GPU, and knowing nvidia it will probably be even more closed than an intel CPU. You will own even less of your hardware
    - deleted 2mo ago
      [deleted]
    - bigyabai 2mo ago
      Nearly all ARM CPUs are "even more closed than an intel CPU" on a driver level. Nvidia stands out by supporting UEFI on ARM, which even Apple refuses: https://docs.nvidia.com/dgx/dgx-spark/uefi-settings.html https://docs.nvidia.com/dgx/dgx-spark/uefi-settings.html
- pizza234 2mo ago
  There are - see the RTX Pro 6000, which has 96 GB. There are a few problems though, primarily, a GPU with lots of VRAM and very high bandwidth is inherently very expensive (on top of which there is also the CUDA premium); AI use cases are better served by SoCs with lower (but still high) bandwidth and more RAM.

> NVIDIA is one of the most open labs. Of course they are. They're commoditizing their complement. I want to own the hardware, not play around in an nvidia fiefdom full of nvidia rules.

bdangubic 2mo ago

nothing stopping you from doing that

Forgeties79 2mo ago
Are you joking? They just bought HF for $13bill and didn’t break a sweat. They are dominant and spreading.
behringer 2mo ago
Can't buy a decent modern Intel gpu to run AI on because of nividias "donation"
- vee-kay 2mo ago
  [dead]
- high_na_euv 2mo ago
  But Crescent Island is expected to appear soon
- dannyw 2mo ago
  The Intel Arc Pro B60 Dual has 48GB of VRAM; and the B70 goes up to 32GB.
  - mstkllah 2mo ago
    What is the support like for them? Can they be seriously considered as alternatives to Nvidia or AMD cards? I have been looking into buying a GPU, specifically the Radeon R9700 AI Pro but noticed the Intel cards too and was not sure what you make of them.
- behringer 2mo ago
  I stand corrected. For some reason I had written off this generation but it does look capable.

bigyabai 2mo ago

You do own the hardware. Nvidia GPUs have FOSS driver alternatives (Nouveau, NOVA) and have supported OpenCL on the proprietary drivers since 2009. If you don't want to use CUDA, they expose the PTX bindings to write your own CUDA alternative too: https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/parallel-thread-execution/index.html https://docs.nvidia.com/cuda/parallel-thread-execution/index...

bayindirh 2mo ago
When last looked at it, NVIDIA was not supporting OpenCL beyond 1.0. Also, when running OpenCL, NVIDIA hardware disables multiple DMA engines, and allows only one memory transfer at a time to prevent OpenCL running as fast as CUDA. Did NVIDIA finally allow open source drivers to access all parts and features of the card to allow feature parity? Last time I checked they were considering a plan for planning a solution to that.
- pjmlp 2mo ago
  People love to blame NVidia on OpenCL failure, maybe Intel and AMD should actually deliver something compute researchers want to use?
  - bayindirh 2mo ago
    I love your insights which enlighten my blind spots most of the time, but I didn't blame NVIDIA for OpenCL's failure. I just noted a company's choices when it comes to a competing set of libraries w.r.t. to their native ones. Having said that, I'll try compiling a OpenCL 3.0 program in the cluster, so I can report whether NVIDIA runs this software, and if yes, how well.
    - pjmlp 2mo ago
      Yeah, however if Intel and AMD actually delivered a working 2.0 with proper support for C++ and Fortran, maybe the OpenCL 3.0 back to 1.0 reboot would not have been needed. Likewise SYSCL although built on top of OpenCL 3.0 primitives, is mostly Intel, which also owns CodePlay, the company that delivered the first working SYSCL compute experience, again neither AMD nor Intel (until it bought CodePlay).

deleted 2mo ago

[deleted]

wjnc 2mo ago

I'll expand on the economics somewhat. My intuition is that you can like a moat left of you in the supply chain, but dislike moats to the right of you. (I'm using left and right as I picture this horizontally drawn. It is usually called vertical integration by economists.) But free competition in your market is worst of all. Free competition right outside your moat is pretty sweet, and that's were parent is commenting on. Nvidia probably likes that ASML is a monopolist (it's called a monopsony). The price is high and Nvidia can't scale as hard as they want to (more general: capital intensive market). This monopsony makes sure that other chip companies can't rapidly scale up and try to beat Nvidia. That there only ever was one other GPU firm (I'm prehistoric; once there were more) and they bungled it on software, is pretty sweet for Nvidia. On the side of their customers. It would be best for Nvidia if there is free competition for the outputs generated from there GPUs. This maximizes consumer surplus and thus demand. Maximum demand for tokens, is maximal demand feeded in their monopoly. If there is a monopoly right from you, demand is curtailed, and your value is limited. And that exactly is why you see interest from token generators for chips. Bridge that moat and gain a larger value surplus. Both NVidia and, say, China actively undercutting the token-supplier value chain is quite interesting to watch. It's like the Opium wars with us as somewhat happy customers. In this same vein, why isn't ASML raising thousands of billions for building their own (subsidiary) chip foundries, while raising prices and starving the market (a little) for their machines.

patrickk 2mo ago
> In this same vein, why isn't ASML raising thousands of billions for building their own (subsidiary) chip foundries, while raising prices and starving the market (a little) for their machines. You're looking this purely through an economic lens, while in reality geopolitical factors play a huge role in what ASML can and cannot do. The US government would likely take an extremely dim view of any new external competitor popping up for their chip foundry industry (especially with all the new US plants being built or planned) and would lean heavily on their vassal/ally the Netherlands to prevent this. Unlike with China, the US has more leverage over the Netherlands[1] The US security state and US tech giants are joined at the hip, as they have been since the beginning of Silicon Valley[1], right through the Snowden revelations through to the present day[2]. [1] https://nltimes.nl/2026/08/20/us-preparing-force-netherlands-ban-asml-selling-china https://nltimes.nl/2026/08/20/us-preparing-force-netherlands... [2] https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/section-702-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-act-fisa-2026-resource-page https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/sect...

Iolaum 2mo ago

While nvidia 's drivers are closed source there's enough interest in running LLM's that you are not locked in using nvidia. Strix Halo chips have been around before dgx spark came out and deliver very similar performance.

amelius 2mo ago

> > NVIDIA is one of the most open labs. > Of course they are. They're commoditizing their complement Then why don't they sell consumer GPUs with tons of memory. They clearly segment the market into consumer versus server/business.

HanClinto 2mo ago
The upcoming RTX Spark [0] is aiming to fill that space -- consumer GPUs with tons of memory. [0] - https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/products/rtx-spark/ https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/products/rtx-spark/
- SuchAnonMuchWow 2mo ago
  This is not a GPU, this is a laptop SoC with CPU and integrated GPU, and knowing nvidia it will probably be even more closed than an intel CPU. You will own even less of your hardware
  - deleted 2mo ago
    [deleted]
  - bigyabai 2mo ago
    Nearly all ARM CPUs are "even more closed than an intel CPU" on a driver level. Nvidia stands out by supporting UEFI on ARM, which even Apple refuses: https://docs.nvidia.com/dgx/dgx-spark/uefi-settings.html https://docs.nvidia.com/dgx/dgx-spark/uefi-settings.html
pizza234 2mo ago
There are - see the RTX Pro 6000, which has 96 GB. There are a few problems though, primarily, a GPU with lots of VRAM and very high bandwidth is inherently very expensive (on top of which there is also the CUDA premium); AI use cases are better served by SoCs with lower (but still high) bandwidth and more RAM.