←back to thread

Ask HN: Why hasn’t AMD made a viable CUDA alternative?

183 points spacebanana7 | 2 comments | 01 Apr 25 14:37 UTC | HN request time: 0.461s | source

I appreciate developing ROCm into something competitive with CUDA would require a lot of work, both internally within AMD and with external contributions to the relevant open source libraries.

However the amount of resources at stake is incredible. The delta between NVIDIA's value and AMD's is bigger than the annual GDP of Spain. Even if they needed to hire a few thousand engineers at a few million in comp each, it'd still be a good investment.

Show context
Lerc ◴[01 Apr 25 17:27 UTC] No.43549371[source]▶
I made a post here a while back suggesting an investment strategy of spending one billion on AMD shares and one billion on software developers to 3rd party write a quality support stack for their hardware. I'm still not sure if its a crazy idea.

Actually it might be better to spend 1B on shares and 10x 100M on development and take ten attempts in parallel and use the best of them.

replies(1): >>43549454 #
1. whiplash451 ◴[01 Apr 25 17:32 UTC] No.43549454[source]▶
What’s the point of buying the 1B worth of AMD shares in your strategy ? (I get the other half)
replies(1): >>43549674 #
2. Lerc ◴[01 Apr 25 17:55 UTC] No.43549674[source]▶
That's your profit source. Make AMD as viable an option as nVidia and you massively increase their stock price. (and probably reduce nVidia at the same time if you're in the shorting game)