AMD have released a tool which converts Nvidia's CUDA code to portable C++ code which works on both Nvidia and AMD cards!

[goodtofufriday]

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/5i9cm4/amd_have_released_a_tool_which_converts_nvidias/

 

Source2: https://github.com/GPUOpen-ProfessionalCompute-Tools/HIP

Source3: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/5i5k0s/amd_creates_a_tool_to_convert_cuda_code_to/

Quote

What is this repository for? 

HIP allows developers to convert CUDA code to portable C++. The same source code can be compiled to run on NVIDIA or AMD GPUs. Key features include: 

HIP is very thin and has little or no performance impact over coding directly in CUDA or hcc "HC" mode. 

HIP allows coding in a single-source C++ programming language including features such as templates, C++11 lambdas, classes, namespaces, and more. 

HIP allows developers to use the "best" development environment and tools on each target platform. 

The "hipify" tool automatically converts source from CUDA to HIP. 

Developers can specialize for the platform (CUDA or hcc) to tune for performance or handle tricky cases 

New projects can be developed directly in the portable HIP C++ language and can run on either NVIDIA or AMD platforms. Additionally, HIP provides porting tools which make it easy to port existing CUDA codes to the HIP layer, with no loss of performance as compared to the original CUDA application. HIP is not intended to be a drop-in replacement for CUDA, and developers should expect to do some manual coding and performance tuning work to complete the port. 

 

Great, great news to me. Although I'm not gonna lie and say I see this being useful to consumers I do think that in enterprise applications it will help AMD even more. Heck maybe it can be used to get passed Gimpworks. 

 

[AlwaysFSX]

Isn't that illegal without AMD having a license?

[TheNuzziNuzz]

Just now, AlwaysFSX said:

Isn't that illegal without AMD having a license?

There's always a way...

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Isn't that illegal without AMD having a license?

AMD's reaction:   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

i dont think it is for their own purposes. To have released it though, maybe.

[AlwaysFSX]

Just now, TheNuzziNuzz said:

There's always a way...

Yeah except for the part where Nvidia sues AMD and suddenly you have an actual monopoly. You don't get to do illegal things and get away with it.

 

Which is also why I asked a question of legality from hopefully someone that actually knows. Not a keyboard warrior.

[AlwaysFSX]

1 minute ago, goodtofufriday said:

AMD's reaction:   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

i dont think it is for their own purposes. To have released it though, maybe.

Yeah it's the releasing it part that's sketchy.

[PlayStation 2]

Heyo, just wanted to let you know that your quote box isn't properly formatted.

Here's a revision if you want.

What is this repository for?

HIP allows developers to convert CUDA code to portable C++. The same source code can be compiled to run on NVIDIA or AMD GPUs. Key features include:

HIP is very thin and has little or no performance impact over coding directly in CUDA or hcc "HC" mode.

HIP allows coding in a single-source C++ programming language including features such as templates, C++11 lambdas, classes, namespaces, and more.

HIP allows developers to use the "best" development environment and tools on each target platform.

The "hipify" tool automatically converts source from CUDA to HIP.

Developers can specialize for the platform (CUDA or hcc) to tune for performance or handle tricky cases

New projects can be developed directly in the portable HIP C++ language and can run on either NVIDIA or AMD platforms. Additionally, HIP provides porting tools which make it easy to port existing CUDA codes to the HIP layer, with no loss of performance as compared to the original CUDA application. HIP is not intended to be a drop-in replacement for CUDA, and developers should expect to do some manual coding and performance tuning work to complete the port.

[The Benjamins]

5 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Isn't that illegal without AMD having a license?

I think its legal,because it is not compiling the source code to work with AMD cards but translating it to another language to then be compiled to work on other hardware. 

[goodtofufriday]

4 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

Heyo, just wanted to let you know that your quote box isn't properly formatted.

Here's a revision if you want.

 

 

Appreciated

[AlwaysFSX]

3 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

I think its legal,because it is not compiling the source code to work with AMD cards but translating it to another language to then be compiled to work on other hardware. 

Thought I read somewhere in the documentation for CUDA that you're not allowed to translate it to a different programming language unless you have a license for CUDA, which AMD does not have.

[dragosudeki]

1 minute ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Thought I read somewhere in the documentation for CUDA that you're not allowed to translate it to a different programming language unless you have a license for CUDA, which AMD does not have.

Well, it's a tool so AMD is not doing the translation themselves. Yeah, they probably tested the translation tool themselves, but as long as they don't release any of the translation results it should be fine I would think.

[Helly]

This is fully legal because AMD obtained a license quite a while ago. I think this is the first thing they've done with it.

 

Click! just over a year ago :). Or was that wrong and not an actual license?

 

 

[Joe_MacDougall]

14 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Yeah except for the part where Nvidia sues AMD and suddenly you have an actual monopoly. You don't get to do illegal things and get away with it.

 

Which is also why I asked a question of legality from hopefully someone that actually knows. Not a keyboard warrior.

They would force NVIDIA to split into two companies which would probably hurt them a lot more. At least in the UK that would happen because of Competition laws.

[AlwaysFSX]

1 minute ago, Helly said:

This is fully legal because AMD obtained a license quite a while ago. I think this is the first thing they've done with it.

 

Click! just over a year ago :). Or was that wrong and not an actual license?

I did not know this.

1 minute ago, huilun02 said:

No. This does not give any AMD product the ability to use CUDA. Instead, AMD is offering this compiler tool that allows software developers to easily port stuff made for CUDA, into an alternative form that AMD can also use. Its not CUDA and no license is required.

 

Its still up to the software developers if they want to do this or not. There is little reason not to, as it means a larger user base for their software.

Of course unless Nvidia offers some 'incentive' that will outweigh the additional profit from Radeon users.

 

It will be interesting to see Apple's opinion on this as their products use Radeon graphics.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[AlwaysFSX]

Just now, Joe_MacDougall said:

They would force NVIDIA to split into two companies which would probably hurt them a lot more. At least in the UK that would happen because of Competition laws.

It's an American company so they wouldn't be split up because of UK law.

[Joe_MacDougall]

Just now, AlwaysFSX said:

It's an American company so they wouldn't be split up because of UK law.

I know but what I'm saying is that the US might have similar competition laws?

[Syfes]

4 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Thought I read somewhere in the documentation for CUDA that you're not allowed to translate it to a different programming language unless you have a license for CUDA, which AMD does not have.

Technically I would think just the CUDA core processors are proprietary to nvidia, and that offering developers a way to translate CUDA code into C++ is much more of a grey area. Then again tbh i have no idea what terms nvidia imposes on developers.

[AlwaysFSX]

2 minutes ago, Joe_MacDougall said:

I know but what I'm saying is that the US might have similar competition laws?

No, if a company fairly and legally becomes the only one in the market they're free to do as they wish within reason and will not be broken up.

 

Edit: typo, been up a while

[Joe_MacDougall]

1 minute ago, AlwaysFSX said:

No, if a company fairly and legally becomes the only one in the market they're free to do as they wish without reason and will not be broken up.

I guess. It happened in the UK with a bank a while ago but I don't know the details about it.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

7 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Thought I read somewhere in the documentation for CUDA that you're not allowed to translate it to a different programming language unless you have a license for CUDA, which AMD does not have.

That would not make sense, since your code is yours. Remember, this isn't translating anything Nvidia has created into something else. It only translates code you write in CUDA language into something else. It is impossible for it to be illegal. It would mean that if you had an idea for a program ans write it in C, then you can write a CUDA version, but if you write the CUDA version first, then it is illegal to write a C version of your own program. Even if Nvidia would include such thing somewhere in its license agreements, it would be void.

There are no legal issues with translating code form one syntax to another.

[ivan134]

10 minutes ago, AlwaysFSX said:

Thought I read somewhere in the documentation for CUDA that you're not allowed to translate it to a different programming language unless you have a license for CUDA, which AMD does not have.

Uhhhh, yes they do.

[DocSwag]

Ayyy looks like AMD finally released it!

 

Kul. Maybe it will give people more incentive to buy AMD cards since if they're using nvidia right now the code can be easily ported over.

[LAwLz]

Isn't this really old? Here is a thread about it from over a year ago.

(Also a fun read sicne it involves a certain person refusing to give sources to his claims)

[goodtofufriday]

1 minute ago, Joe_MacDougall said:

I guess. It happened in the UK with a bank a while ago but I don't know the details about it.

If a company is large enough and is found to be unfair the government will break them up into smaller companies. Look up AT&T in the 90s as a more recent example

[Joe_MacDougall]

1 minute ago, huilun02 said:

Seriously you think such laws actually work?

The US has antitrust laws. Look how effective they are.

Good point.