Jump to content

AMD: "CUDA is doomed"

EChondo
By EChondo
in Tech News
 Share
Posted

http://vr-zone.com/articles/nimble-like-a-starfish-amds-roy-taylor-sits-down-with-vr-zone/49320.html

 

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.

Hmm, interesting...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Of course they are going to say this, Nvidia will probably now release the same about opencl

PC Builder, Engineer... BACON    Project Cobalt: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/38058-project-cobalt-copper-piping-laser-etching-and-more/#entry489258

| NZXT Switch 810 | i5-3570k | gigabyte UD-5H | Corsair Vengeance 8gb ram | GTX 670 | 2x 60gb intel 330 series ssd's in raid 0 | 1tb seagate barracuda hdd | Corsair tx750m | XSPC razor GPU and CPU waterblocks | XSPC d5 vario pump | Thermochill Pa140.3 | phoyba 280mm radiator | Chromed Copper tubing |

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Very interesting indeed. Cuda is nice but amd is cheaper. Physx is also nice but its getting to a point where cuda isnt really needed to run it as there are cpus with power. Also amd give games as well. Its not that cuda is very bad, i think its that cheaper prices and bundles go very well with gamers.

cpu: intel i5 4670k @ 4.5ghz Ram: G skill ares 2x4gb 2166mhz cl10 Gpu: GTX 680 liquid cooled cpu cooler: Raijintek ereboss Mobo: gigabyte z87x ud5h psu: cm gx650 bronze Case: Zalman Z9 plus


Listen if you care.

Cpu: intel i7 4770k @ 4.2ghz Ram: G skill  ripjaws 2x4gb Gpu: nvidia gtx 970 cpu cooler: akasa venom voodoo Mobo: G1.Sniper Z6 Psu: XFX proseries 650w Case: Zalman H1

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Marketing , CUDA is till the major player in the enterprise

Interested in Business and Technology

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Shit talking even between major corporations? Lol

But yeah, I think he's probably right about the whole proprietary thing.

However, he's wrong about PhysX. I want it. I can run it on my CPU. Bam. I win.

† Christian Member †

For my pertinent links to guides, reviews, and anything similar, go here, and look under the spoiler labeled such. A brief history of Unix and it's relation to OS X by Builder.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

hes just mad that tressfx is nothing compaired to physx, but hes right about cuda

Cpu: Intel i7 4770k @4.4 Ghz | Case: Corsair 350D | Motherbord: Z87 Gryphon | Ram: dominator platinum 4X4 1866 | Video Card: SLI GTX 980 Ti | Power Supply: Seasonic 1000 platinum | Monitor: ACER XB270HU | Keyboard: RK-9100 | Mouse: R.A.T. 7 | Headset : HD 8 DJ | Watercooled

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Yep, regardless of the actual technical aspects of it, there's this:

So honestly, I don't see what your point is. Looks fine (aka good enough) to me.

† Christian Member †

For my pertinent links to guides, reviews, and anything similar, go here, and look under the spoiler labeled such. A brief history of Unix and it's relation to OS X by Builder.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

Yep, regardless of the actual technical aspects of it, there's this:

So honestly, I don't see what your point is. Looks fine (aka good enough) to me.

So it's fine if it runs "fine" because Nvidia is making it run "fine"?

 

Alright, not my opinion, but I'd rather not get low FPS for some extra detail that shouldn't really bog down my system in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

AMD could develop some kind of physics engine that could "probably" compare to PHYsX, if they had the money/cares to do so. Personally, I found that TresFX in Tomb raider was MUCH more engaging than "Advanced" PhysX in Metro 2033 or Last Light.

 

I agree with CUDA though, look at recent Adobe applications and Bit/LiteCoin mining. All in the OpenCL.

"Don't make a girl a promise, if you know you can't keep it" | "Didn't you hear? Spartans never die."

-Gaming- FX 8150 @ 4.2GHz, HD 7870 Tahiti LE 2GB @ 1.1GHz, ASRock 990FX Extreme3, 8GB DDR3 1333 MHz, WIndows 10, Custom Watercooled, NZXT Switch 810

-Audio Editing/Mixing- Mac Mini Late 2014, Core i7 3.5Ghz, 8GB RAM, 2TB Fusion Drive, OSX 10.12 El Captain -Phone- HTC One M7 32GB

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

So it's fine if it runs "fine" because Nvidia is making it run "fine"?

 

Alright, not my opinion, but I'd rather not get low FPS for some extra detail that shouldn't really bog down my system in the first place.

Well, my point from that video was simply that whatever FPS you are losing is minuscule at best.

† Christian Member †

For my pertinent links to guides, reviews, and anything similar, go here, and look under the spoiler labeled such. A brief history of Unix and it's relation to OS X by Builder.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

OpenCL is already on Nvidia cards, but they have setup CUDA for dedicated software to support the hardware more. OpenCL tends to be buggy compared to CUDA, but CUDA isnt as powerfull but offers more support and is 100% customisable

Character artist in the Games industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I can see this thread quickly becoming an amd vs nvidia flame war...

 

Also this article was posted a few days ago. (don't have a link, as I don't recall what the thread was titled)

 

 

And I fully agree, since day 1 of PhysX being proprietary I've said it would fail because it's not accessible to everyone. Having to develop a game, then develop separate feature set because of proprietary software holds back innovation. The only way for PhysX to become a viable platform is for them to open it up and allow anyone to develop for it without costing an arm, a leg, and rights to your products final looks.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Users cannot, and will not securely manage key material. Most users can't and the ones that can, wont.

Ask me about Bitcoin, Litecoin, Crypto-Currencies, and/or Mining them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I can see this thread quickly becoming an amd vs nvidia flame war...

 

Also this article was posted a few days ago. (don't have a link, as I don't recall what the thread was titled)

 

 

And I fully agree, since day 1 of PhysX being proprietary I've said it would fail because it's not accessible to everyone. Having to develop a game, then develop separate feature set because of proprietary software holds back innovation. The only way for PhysX to become a viable platform is for them to open it up and allow anyone to develop for it without costing an arm, a leg, and rights to your products final looks.

Nvidia is planning to release PhysX support to AMD and will be fully supported on next gen consoles (Xbox one and PS4)

Character artist in the Games industry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

I can see this thread quickly becoming an amd vs nvidia flame war...

 

Also this article was posted a few days ago. (don't have a link, as I don't recall what the thread was titled)

 

 

And I fully agree, since day 1 of PhysX being proprietary I've said it would fail because it's not accessible to everyone. Having to develop a game, then develop separate feature set because of proprietary software holds back innovation. The only way for PhysX to become a viable platform is for them to open it up and allow anyone to develop for it without costing an arm, a leg, and rights to your products final looks.

Very sorry if this was already posted, I haven't seen anything recently...

 

Yeah it would be awesome if Nvidia actually had PhysX open source, maybe then AMD could develop for it(doubt it) instead of the more recent deal that Nvidia tried to do with AMD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Only slightly arrogant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Nvidia is planning to release PhysX support to AMD and will be fully supported on next gen consoles (Xbox one and PS4)

 

Not the on the desktop GPU side of it. They also are not opening up their proprietary developer software for it. Massive royalties and in-game decisions will still be left for nvidia to make choices and effectively still control physx in their proprietary set up.

 

 

I found the link original thread.

http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/42843-amd-refreshing-the-never-settle-bundle-this-month-with-never-settle-forever/

 

However it's talking about the never settle bundle instead of the cuda comments, so while they link to the same thing I feel they are entirely different topics worthy of separate threads.

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
Users cannot, and will not securely manage key material. Most users can't and the ones that can, wont.

Ask me about Bitcoin, Litecoin, Crypto-Currencies, and/or Mining them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I can see this thread quickly becoming an amd vs nvidia flame war...

 

Also this article was posted a few days ago. (don't have a link, as I don't recall what the thread was titled)

 

 

And I fully agree, since day 1 of PhysX being proprietary I've said it would fail because it's not accessible to everyone. Having to develop a game, then develop separate feature set because of proprietary software holds back innovation. The only way for PhysX to become a viable platform is for them to open it up and allow anyone to develop for it without costing an arm, a leg, and rights to your products final looks.

Nvidia asked AMD Years back when it Started if they wanted to use it and they didn't want it, because they tried to make there own Physics Engine but they failed.

 

 

How is TressFX nothing compared to PhysX?

TressFX is waaay to peformance Hungry, and not even close to PhysX.

This is a 3 Years Old PhysX Hair Tech Demo:

AMD lacks Years behind with that and OpenCL is still way to buggy nobody that does 3D Render would change to OpenCl, because its to unstable.

The best thing that can happen to Us is that Nvidia gives PhysX also to AMD and they make PhysX not Nvidia Exclusiv but PC exclusiv.

RTX2070OC 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted
  • Author

Nvidia asked AMD Years back when it Started if they wanted to use it and they didn't want it, because they tried to make there own Physics Engine but they failed.

 

TressFX is waaay to peformance Hungry, and not even close to PhysX.

Nvidia did ask AMD if they wanted to use it, but you also left out that Nvidia also asked AMD how their cards worked AND Nvidia also said that THEY would be writing AMD's drivers for them.

 

Yeah, give your competition everything there is to know about your hardware just so you can use PhysX, makes a lot of sense.  :rolleyes:

 

At least TressFX works on ANY DirectX11 enabled GPU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

Nvidia asked AMD Years back when it Started if they wanted to use it and they didn't want it, because they tried to make there own Physics Engine but they failed.

 

 

TressFX is waaay to peformance Hungry, and not even close to PhysX.

This is a 3 Years Old PhysX Hair Tech Demo:

AMD lacks Years behind with that and OpenCL is still way to buggy nobody that does 3D Render would change to OpenCl, because its to unstable.

The best thing that can happen to Us is that Nvidia gives PhysX also to AMD and they make PhysX not Nvidia Exclusiv but PC exclusiv.

 

The video you're showing off is nothing more than a tech demo. TressFX is in an actual game... funny how fanboys can't tell the difference.

MOBO - Asus Sabertooth 990FX R2.0   CPU - AMD Phenom II X6 1055T @ 3.5GHz - Corsair H80i   RAM - 2x Corsair Vengence 4GB DDR3 @ 1666 MHz   

GPU - SAPPHIRE 100362-3L Radeon R9 290 4GB Tri-X OC  Sound - ASUS Xonar DSX  PSU - Thermaltake SMART M Series SP-850M 850W

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

I agree.  Nvidia's very closed-off and proprietary nature is going to prevent its technologies from going very far.  PhysX has been out for a while now and has only been used for a few half-decent particle effects here and there.  Many programs that take advantage of GPU compute are now adopting OpenCL, which may not be as robust as CUDA now, but will be much more easily serviced because of its open nature.

 

Choosing GeForce over Radeon doesn't enhance the overall gaming experience.  And once OpenCL gains more traction, GeForce won't be as compelling for compute anymore.  Nvidia keeps these things proprietary to get people to buy its stuff, but it's not necessarily working.  It only really works for 3D Vision, but the stereoscopic 3D fad is quickly fading away.

 

It's just like Intel and Thunderbolt.  Because Intel has Thunderbolt on total lockdown, it won't go nearly as far as it can.

Intel Core i7-7700K | EVGA GeForce GTX 1080 FTW | ASUS ROG Strix Z270G Gaming | 32GB G-Skill TridentZ RGB DDR4-3200 | Corsair AX860i

Cooler Master MasterCase Pro 3 | Samsung 950 Pro 256GB | Samsung 850 Evo 1TB | EKWB Custom Loop | Noctua NF-F12(x4)/NF-A14 LTT Special Edition

Dell S2716DGR | Corsair K95 RGB Platinum (Cherry MX Brown) | Logitech G502 Proteus Spectrum | FiiO E17 DAC/Amp | Beyerdynamic DT990 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted

The video you're showing off is nothing more than a tech demo. TressFX is in an actual game... funny how fanboys can't tell the difference.

 

You didn't read it. You didn't watch it. You fail. Check again:

Nvidia asked AMD Years back when it Started if they wanted to use it and they didn't want it, because they tried to make there own Physics Engine but they failed.

 

 

TressFX is waaay to peformance Hungry, and not even close to PhysX.

This is a 3 Years Old PhysX Hair Tech Demo:

AMD lacks Years behind with that and OpenCL is still way to buggy nobody that does 3D Render would change to OpenCl, because its to unstable.

The best thing that can happen to Us is that Nvidia gives PhysX also to AMD and they make PhysX not Nvidia Exclusiv but PC exclusiv.

Did you see it that time? 

I'll say it in case you didn't: That video is a 3 year old PhysX, not TressFX, Tech Demo.

PhysX has been in games for a very long time as compared to TressFX. :|

† Christian Member †

For my pertinent links to guides, reviews, and anything similar, go here, and look under the spoiler labeled such. A brief history of Unix and it's relation to OS X by Builder.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing Tech News

×