• @woelkchen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      710 months ago

      I’m really curious who at AMD thought it to be a great idea to develop a CUDA compatibility layer but not to release it. As stated, the release was only made because AMD ended financial support.

      • 520
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        The problem is that if we make CUDA the standard, then they put nVidia in control of a standard. nVidia could try to manipulate the situation in future versions of CUDA by reworking it to fuck with this implementation, giving AMD a shaky name in the space.

        We saw this happen with Wine, where although probably not deliberately, MS made Windows compatibility a moving and very unstable target.

        That is something tolerable by open source communities, but isn’t something that will fly for official support.

        • @woelkchen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          110 months ago

          The problem is that if we make CUDA the standard, then they put nVidia in control of a standard. nVidia could try to manipulate the situation in future versions of CUDA by reworking it to fuck with this implementation, giving AMD a shaky name in the space.

          I get that but why woulde they fund development of ZLUDA for two years?

          • 520
            link
            fedilink
            210 months ago

            Reverse engineering CUDA can bring other benefits. It allows AMD to see what nVidia is doing right and potentially implement it in their own tech. Having not only documentation but a working implementation can help wonders in this regard.

            Or maybe they did want to use it but was scared of getting SLAPPed by Nvidia, so instead let the dev open source it.