←back to thread

Nvidia won, we all lost

(blog.sebin-nyshkim.net)
977 points todsacerdoti | 3 comments | 04 Jul 25 21:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.779s | source
Show context
__turbobrew__ ◴[04 Jul 25 23:27 UTC] No.44468824[source]▶
> With over 90% of the PC market running on NVIDIA tech, they’re the clear winner of the GPU race. The losers are every single one of us.

I have been rocking AMD GPU ever since the drivers were upstreamed into the linux kernel. No regrets.

I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games, and getting all in a huff about it isn’t worth my time or energy. But consumer gotta consoooooom and then cry and outrage when they are exploited instead of just walking away and doing something else.

Same with magic the gathering, the game went to shit and so many people got outraged and in a big huff but they still spend thousands on the hobby. I just stopped playing mtg.

replies(22): >>44468885 #>>44468985 #>>44469036 #>>44469146 #>>44469164 #>>44470357 #>>44470480 #>>44470607 #>>44471458 #>>44471685 #>>44471784 #>>44471811 #>>44472146 #>>44472400 #>>44473527 #>>44473828 #>>44473856 #>>44476633 #>>44485501 #>>44487391 #>>44489487 #>>44493815 #
duckmysick ◴[05 Jul 25 09:48 UTC] No.44471458[source]▶
> I have also realized that there is a lot out there in the world besides video games, and getting all in a huff about it isn’t worth my time or energy.

I'd really love to try AMD as a daily driver. For me CUDA is the showstopper. There's really nothing comparable in the AMD camp.

replies(1): >>44471758 #
1. delusional ◴[05 Jul 25 10:45 UTC] No.44471758[source]▶
ROCM is, to some degree and in some areas, a pretty decent alternative. Developing with it is often times a horrible experience, but once something works, it works fine.
replies(1): >>44471924 #
2. pixelesque ◴[05 Jul 25 11:18 UTC] No.44471924[source]▶
> but once something works, it works fine.

Is there "forwards compatibility" to the same code working on the next cards yet like PTX provided Nvidia?

Last time (4 years ago?) I looked into ROCM, you seemed to have to compile for each revision of each architecture.

replies(1): >>44475461 #
3. delusional ◴[05 Jul 25 20:53 UTC] No.44475461[source]▶
I'm decently sure you have to compile separately for each architecture, and if you elect to compile for multiple architectures up front, you'll have excruciating compile times. You'd think that would be annoying, but it ends up not really mattering since AMD completely switches out the toolchain about every graphics generation anyway. That's not a good reason to not have forwards compatibility, but it is a reason.

The reason I'm not completely sure is because I'm just doing this as a hobby, and I only have a single card, and that single card has never seen a revision. I think that's generally the best way to be happy with ROCM. Accept that it's at the abstraction level of embedded programming, any change in the hardware will have to result in a change in the software.