> The entire GPU programming landscape is so fragmented and unapproachable now. it's fragmented, true, but it's not that bad. > If they'd only exposed the pro

> The entire GPU programming landscape is so fragmented and unapproachable now. it's fragmented, true, but it's not that bad. > If they'd only exposed the processors directly and worked to unify behind a common compiler frontend... they don't need to, LLVM-SPIR is supposed to enable this - compile kernels to IR and let the runtime JIT it into the GPUs required binary. > And what Intel's Larrabee would have enabled. intel did release the larrabee, sort of. it's called the Xeon Phi (and it isn't exactly great..) > The comically bad software from AMD AMD have a well deserved reputation, but things aren't that bad now. > OpenCL is better than nothing, but even if the implementations were of usable quality i don't know what problems you run into specifically, but most of the runtimes are definitely of usable quality. ironically, it's apple have the worst runtime (but even that isn't so bad).. think of that what you will! things have improved in the OpenCL space, and they will continue to improve for the foreseeable future. AMD and intel are doing good here, and nvidia actually do support OpenCL. questions of performance portability aside, CL is a pretty good option for people wanting to run on GPUs.