← Back to context

Comment by RcouF1uZ4gsC

19 days ago

I can actually explain in far less than one Tweet:

CUDA

CUDA was released to consumers in 2006. AMD had plenty of time to counteract that with their own well before the AI boom, especially since back then they now had both CPUs and GPUs under the same roof meaning they actually had an advantage on paper over Nvidia at the time.

It was even their initiative back then called Fusion, and because of that I though AMD would end up overtaking both Intel who could only do CPUs and Nvidia who could only do GPUs. Instead their APUs turned out to be just mediocre CPUs and GPUs at beast without ani killer apps/features, and so lost both markets and had to struggle to regain at least the CPU sector but mostly because Intel was complacent and incompetent on the architecture and manufacturing sides.

Also what does "oppty" from the title mean?

  • AMD had plenty of OpenCL investments as well as C++Amp, which IMO is much cleaner than CUDA. The idea of a Microsoft-led revolution in GPU-compute isn't bad, especially coinciding with C++11 Lambda functions and whatnot.

    That obviously didn't work out, but you can't say that AMD didn't do anything for those years. Especially as AMD was falling into bankruptcy at the time, it was clear that AMD needed to rely upon others to take on the risk of new APIs.

    I'm still curious how Microsoft screwed the pooch here. Windows8 was seen as a failure, but I think I can safely say that C++AMP / ConcRT / etc. etc. were well designed APIs. AMD lost some momentum here, and had to do a CUDA-based API for ROCm moving forward a few years later.

    • I'm not sure why AMD has bet on Windows. The SFX industry has always been using Linux, and various Unixes before that. All the big clusters also run Linux. If they wanted to steal market share from Nvidia, then why also convince people to switch to Windows? Maybe their target customer was someone who has a workstation with one or two GPUs?

      10 replies →

    • AMDs investment in OpenCL and RoCM before the FOMO of the last years was only for the checkbox they never showed real intend. Especially on consumer hardware...

    • C++AMP was more a POC than anything else.

      The work on ConcRT and WinRT is on the genesis of C++ Co-routines, initially proposed by Microsoft to WG21.

      Anything else, Microsoft has always been more interested in doing compute via DirectX, aka DirectCompute.

      I will leave the WinRT/UWP rant for another day.

      3 replies →