• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

AMD is a starfish and Intel a whale.

I think CUDA is doomed. Our industry doesn’t like proprietary standards. PhysX is an utter failure because it’s proprietary. Nobody wants it. You don’t want it, I don’t want it, gamers don’t want it. Analysts don’t want it. In the early days of our industry, you could get away with it and it worked. We’ve all had enough of it. They’re unhealthy.
Click to expand...

While I'm sure that AMD would love for this to be true, the evidence is quite the opposite.

I'm no fan of propitiatory standards, but CUDA is the *only* GPGPU interface that has widespread use in scientific and financial computing (which are the biggest GPGPU markets by far). CUDA has low-level interfaces to the commonly used linear algebra routines, and can be easily integrated with existing C/C++ and FORTRAN codes. The same can't be said of Open CL. Open CL may ultimately be a more general package, but it's far, far more difficult for the average GPGPU programmer to implement (myself included).


There are a lot of interesting points in that interview, but the "doom of CUDA" is frankly either delusion, wishful thinking, or just plain rubbish. Uptake of CUDA is accelerating, and it's currently the only standard for GPGPU programming in science, engineering, and finance. Maybe the next-gen consoles will start something of a revolution as far as Open CL physics programming goes (since both consoles run on AMD hardware), but for the wider market there is absolutely no sign of CUDA going away. If anything it's going from strength to strength.



... I'd love to see CUDA "die" and be replaced by an open standard *that has equal capabilities*. Unfortunately, no such standard exists so far. AMD are dreaming.
 
I think CUDA is doomed. Our industry doesn’t like proprietary standards. PhysX is an utter failure because it’s proprietary. Nobody wants it. You don’t want it, I don’t want it, gamers don’t want it. Analysts don’t want it. In the early days of our industry, you could get away with it and it worked. We’ve all had enough of it. They’re unhealthy.
Nvidia should be congratulated for its invention. As a trend, GPGPU is absolutely fantastic and fabulous. But that was then, this is now. Now, collectively our industry doesn’t want a proprietary standard. That’s why people are migrating to OpenCL.
Click to expand...

It comes as no surprise that AMD have used over the top words and phrases like 'doomed' and 'utter failure' for CUDA and PhysX. This man's arrogance holds no bounds, I am a gamer and I want it. Generalising is dangerous and foolish. Would love to see AMD invent something for themselves, alas cant see it in my lifetime. I think it best they stick to giving away gaming bundles to keep people buying their cards.
 
LambChop said:
It comes as no surprise that AMD have used over the top words and phrases like 'doomed' and 'utter failure' for CUDA and PhysX. This man's arrogance holds no bounds, I am a gamer and I want it. Generalising is dangerous and foolish. Would love to see AMD invent something for themselves, alas cant see it in my lifetime. I think it best they stick to giving away gaming bundles to keep people buying their cards.
Click to expand...

Agree It was a little over the top. lol @amd for trying hahaha
 
Last edited:
Intel is heavily into CPU's, but they're also in everything from flash memory, ram, to custom chips and embedded chips (all things that are still in very high demand, and that demand is likely to rise with the increase in non desktop devices).

I suspect Intel will adapt fairly well if needed, IIRC their new low power CPU's for things like tablets and netbooks are beating the competition in performance per watt.
 
He talks some sense and then also some complete nonsense, goto love the dig at Nvidia about being obsessed with launching consoles, I can almost ses it under a big banner of the Xbone and PS4.

Then going on abouit how intel CPU's are really APU's. ok fine if that is the case then why does he reckon that intel will adopt the APU tag and then he says "I do think that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" laughing out loud does he realise that in that case the first Intel APU's were released in 2010 a whole year before lano appeared, so who is imitating who.

I do agree that eventually Cuda is doomed how long it will take is anyones guess, just aswell that openCL works well on both sides hardware else that would be a total failure aswell.

Big cores get mentioned and then "we can’t comment on unannounced products" either very clever and he knows how to create spin (which of course he does) or maybe there is something to it after all.

Got to laugh at the 9590 being a great success.

More physics, sounds great but haven't AMD been going on about an open equvilent for ages, where is it then. and hasnt PhysX just be confirmed on the new consoles, even if it is only onthe cpu. It will mean we probably wont be seeing a GPU based physics on the new consoles at all.
 
Last edited:
bru said:
Then going on abouit how intel CPU's are really APU's. ok fine if that is the case then why does he reckon that intel will adopt the APU tag and then he says "I do think that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery" laughing out loud does he realise that in that case the first Intel APU's were released in 2010 a whole year before lano appeared, so who is imitating who.
Click to expand...

[pedant]Intel's first CPU with GPU (Clarkdale iirc) had separate CPU and GPU dies on the same substrate (Multi Chip Module), not a monolithic core[/pedant]
 
d_brennen said:
[pedant]Intel's first CPU with GPU (Clarkdale iirc) had separate CPU and GPU dies on the same substrate (Multi Chip Module), not a monolithic core[/pedant]
Click to expand...

Well ok if you are going to be picky about it AMD's lano was first shown to the public in 2010, Sandy bridge in 2009. which ever way you swing it intel got their first
 
I own AMD cards and I want physx,as do the so many million people who will own the next gen consoles. Who wouldnt? What a douche this guy is. Sounds very "we cannot have this so no one can" really.

I still dont quite understand how the next gen consoles have this though if they are AMD cards?
 
oldestgregg said:
I own AMD cards and I want physx,as do the so many million people who will own the next gen consoles. Who wouldnt? What a douche this guy is. Sounds very "we cannot have this so no one can" really.

I still dont quite understand how the next gen consoles have this though if they are AMD cards?
Click to expand...

They have software PhysX, you probably have software PhysX installed on your PC, a lot of gamers do, as quite a few games used to use software PhysX.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom