The AMD Execution Thread [2007 - 2017]
- Thread starter overclocked_enthusiasm
- Start date
-
- Tags
- amd
- Status
Any ideas if the founders section for HSA has a typo in it, or did something happen since March?
http://www.hsafoundation.com/members/
I think the A section is a little more sparse than it once was.
http://www.hsafoundation.com/members/
I think the A section is a little more sparse than it once was.
The site structure has changed somewhat, but indeed AMD was but is now not part of the Members chart.
If it's not some kind of error, there are some other items of note like the ARM's refusal to implement HSAIL in its latest cache-coherent Bifrost GPU architecture, Qualcomm's switch to the new ARM license for new cores, and ARM's significant influence as IP provider to at least half of the foundation.
HSAIL has so far been mostly known in conjunction with AMD's hardware and AMD's efforts.
Anandtech's article on ARM's new GPU architecture has ARM rather curtly dismissing HSAIL in favor of OpenCL.
edit: Actually, the Anandtech section is a bit more ominous, although not a direct quote and might have other context. It addresses ARM's concerns as never "totally buying into" HSAIL. The never is not in quotes, but might have more finality if representative.
HSAIL has so far been mostly known in conjunction with AMD's hardware and AMD's efforts.
Anandtech's article on ARM's new GPU architecture has ARM rather curtly dismissing HSAIL in favor of OpenCL.
edit: Actually, the Anandtech section is a bit more ominous, although not a direct quote and might have other context. It addresses ARM's concerns as never "totally buying into" HSAIL. The never is not in quotes, but might have more finality if representative.
Last edited:
This is surprising to say the least. Looking into it...
The specific quote in my notebook is “We never totally bought into [HSAIL]”. It was in response to a question about HSAIL support.
That quote sounds like a Freudian slip about HSAIL's prospects.
edit: corrected punctuation
Last edited:
AMD is back. I'm told this was an error in a website update. (It looks like it was TI that was supposed to be removed)
That is a better scenario for AMD, aside from HSA losing a founder.
Thank you for looking into it.
TI wasn't removed, but moved to Contributors
Somewhat humorously, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Argonne National Laboratory have both undergone mitosis, at least with the browsers I've seen it from. The academics section's logo pics seem a little inconsistent as well.
Those sections do appear to have some legitimately new entries since the last snapshot, though some are illegible or unreadable to me.
It'll hopefully look better when another blurb concerning HSA comes up and provides a reminder that this site exists.
Those sections do appear to have some legitimately new entries since the last snapshot, though some are illegible or unreadable to me.
It'll hopefully look better when another blurb concerning HSA comes up and provides a reminder that this site exists.
If you speak about the quality of the logo's there.. Its the problem when thoses "company" university have not send vectorized logo, or dont have a graphic charts where take them with good quality, look like the graphic designer of the site have not search to do anything for it. ( just placing them as they are )
That's my assumption for the academics section. The duplicated national laboratory logos have what appear to be a properly scaled logo that is then cropped incorrectly, or a blurry logo that fits the dimensions of the picture.
Generally I don't plug my own articles, but the timing is highly relevant on this.
HSA 1.1: http://www.anandtech.com/show/10387/hsa-11-specification-launched-multi-vendor-support
Parts of AMD are also not using HSAIL. ROCm is HSA-based, but they're choosing to focus on compiling directly to the ISA, skipping using HSAIL as any kind of intermediate. Though they still use the runtime.
And just to follow up on the above, I reached out to ARM about HSA after the 1.1 announcement and got some further information from them on where they stand with HSA. In short they're not going to use HSAIL (even with 1.1) but like ROCm they are embracing HSA for the hardware aspects of the specification and the advantages of a well-defined, common platform for how heterogeneous compute should work. G71 is basically an HSA 1.1 GPU in that regard.
Am I off-base in seeing perverse incentive right now, and perhaps permanently to do what ARM and AMD have done?
It sounds like finalizers are more of an impediment for time to market, and if you are trying to further your own platform, there's less of a reason to expend resources and time on giving workloads the ability readily use someone else's platform.
Like you mentioned in the earlier article, a company like Mediatek might have an interest in allowing objects to freely move between ARM, Qualcomm, IMG, and AMD(?) hardware.
Qualcomm might want to allow shifting between its Hexagon, GPU, and CPU resources, although how many workflows are going to straddle that many domains?
ARM and AMD wanted to take standard and mature languages and front ends that are supported and better-understood by everyone, and then feed them into the specific platforms they know intimately, and do so in a timely fashion while under competitive pressure. They can do more to tweak or add value at either end, and the credit and benefit goes to them.
There's no 1.0 representation and tool chain in the middle, nor an avenue via the IL or finalizers to allow other vendors to benefit from their value-add on either side.
The tune might change if the question was whether Future AMD or Future ARM want to keep better continuity with their existing ecosystems or the additional complexity they must manage alone, but that's a Future Them problem.
Not using the vendor-agnostic underpinnings of HSA sort of leaves the "don't make dumb hardware" portion of HSA, which is nice.
It sounds like finalizers are more of an impediment for time to market, and if you are trying to further your own platform, there's less of a reason to expend resources and time on giving workloads the ability readily use someone else's platform.
Like you mentioned in the earlier article, a company like Mediatek might have an interest in allowing objects to freely move between ARM, Qualcomm, IMG, and AMD(?) hardware.
Qualcomm might want to allow shifting between its Hexagon, GPU, and CPU resources, although how many workflows are going to straddle that many domains?
ARM and AMD wanted to take standard and mature languages and front ends that are supported and better-understood by everyone, and then feed them into the specific platforms they know intimately, and do so in a timely fashion while under competitive pressure. They can do more to tweak or add value at either end, and the credit and benefit goes to them.
There's no 1.0 representation and tool chain in the middle, nor an avenue via the IL or finalizers to allow other vendors to benefit from their value-add on either side.
The tune might change if the question was whether Future AMD or Future ARM want to keep better continuity with their existing ecosystems or the additional complexity they must manage alone, but that's a Future Them problem.
Not using the vendor-agnostic underpinnings of HSA sort of leaves the "don't make dumb hardware" portion of HSA, which is nice.
I would that that the assumption that this is for competitive reasons is off base. The impression I get is that this has to do more with what software paradigms make sense; both ARM and AMD are pursuing OpenCL 2.0/C++ style paradigms, which would be fully portable among vendors.
A1xLLcqAgt0qc2RyMz0y
Veteran
Current Professional GPU market share report:
http://jonpeddie.com/publications/workstation_report
Nvidia holds a 4-1 edge over AMD.
http://jonpeddie.com/publications/workstation_report
Nvidia holds a 4-1 edge over AMD.
monstercameron
Newcomer
Guys, take a look at the stock price...
The most recent event from a quick search is an investment firm upgrading AMD to a buy with a doubled price target.
They seem positive on AMD's prospects with Zen, VR, and 4k. The latter two seem to be reinforced by AMD's apparent semicustom wins in the form of upcoming consoles.
Some of AMD's selling off of itself also apparently makes them feel better about its immediate cash position and cash burn.
They seem positive on AMD's prospects with Zen, VR, and 4k. The latter two seem to be reinforced by AMD's apparent semicustom wins in the form of upcoming consoles.
Some of AMD's selling off of itself also apparently makes them feel better about its immediate cash position and cash burn.
- Status
