21–30 of 57 posts
Having to choose between Steam support and ROCm drivers is a pain - it stops tinkering. Almost everyone on Linux will have experience of breaking their drivers at some point, and installing another alternate set is a big risk. It seems silly to not have OpenCL and HIP access without having to use this alternate stack.
Having to choose between Steam support and ROCm drivers is a pain - it stops tinkering. Almost everyone on Linux will have experience of breaking their drivers at some point, and installing another alternate set is a big risk. It seems silly to not have OpenCL and HIP access without having to use this alternate stack.
The ROCm and AMDGPU PRO stacks were unified with ROCm 4.5 and AMDGPU 21.40. I would expect Steam to work. That was just a couple weeks ago, but have you tried it out?
So even if I wanted, I can't. Sincerely, I'm fed up with AMD's attitude towards compute.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The ROCm and AMDGPU PRO stacks were unified with ROCm 4.5 and AMDGPU 21.40. I would expect Steam to work. That was just a couple weeks ago, but have you tried it out?
Isn't 4.5 also the version, that kicked Vega64 to the curb? So even if I wanted, I can't. Sincerely, I'm fed up with AMD's attitude towards compute.
ROCm 4.5 is the _last_ version to support the Vega10 ASIC (MI25, Vega56, Vega64).
https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/#amd-instinct-mi25...
The next ROCm release after 4.5 is sometime in Q1 next year. So it's on planned death really soon.
It is transitioning to _that_ comical AMD "enabled in the codebase but not tested and not supported" state, rotting slowly like Polaris support did.
It's something that has very little uptake because it's not supported on mainline GPUs? I want to use it for compute on something like a rx 6800 and to my knowledge can't
AMD is much smaller in comparison, and their main focus with ROCM is to get pytorch and tensorflow to work with enterprise GPUs. Everything else is long tail in terms of scale.
Once the developers are familiar with CUDA, what are the chances you'd choose ROCm for deployment? Yeah, not great.
Consumer cards' ROCm support is strategic.
I tried ROCm. I bought a supported card (RX570/RX580 series). Within 12 months, AMD dropped support. Newer versions of ROCm didn't work with the card. Older versions didn't actually work either, since all other tooling assumed newer versions. Dependency hell. When things kinda started working in one context, where I could use old tooling (not the one I wanted to use ROCm in), it CUPy was slower than CPU, and then har…
And even if AMD's offering was not an absolute dumpster fire, Google, Microsoft and Amazon all have their own accelerator that are maturing and will be more cost effective on the long run.
I tried ROCm. I bought a supported card (RX570/RX580 series). Within 12 months, AMD dropped support. Newer versions of ROCm didn't work with the card. Older versions didn't actually work either, since all other tooling assumed newer versions. Dependency hell. When things kinda started working in one context, where I could use old tooling (not the one I wanted to use ROCm in), it CUPy was slower than CPU, and then har…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand AMD has a fraction of the engineering resources Intel and Nvidia have. They need to make some choice and looking back at the last few years it seems that their choice to focus their efforts on hardware and gaming paid off.
On the flip side, I think that they haven't focused on a compelling compute story means that anyone doing anything other than pure gaming is better served by an Nvidia card.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't 4.5 also the version, that kicked Vega64 to the curb? So even if I wanted, I can't. Sincerely, I'm fed up with AMD's attitude towards compute.
> Isn't 4.5 also the version, that kicked Vega64 to the curb? ROCm 4.5 is the _last_ version to support the Vega10 ASIC (MI25, Vega56, Vega64). https://github.com/RadeonOpenCompute/ROCm/#amd-instinct-mi25... The next ROCm release after 4.5 is sometime in Q1 next year. So it's on planned death really soon. It is transitioning to _that_ comical AMD "enabled in the codebase but not tested and not supported" state, rotti…
I was concerned about that as well, but I don't personally know anyone who owns a gfx900 card. I'm a little unclear on what impact it will have on the community.