You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I certainly like the idea of using a general interface better than a proprietary one. However, in chatting with our local GPGPU expert, I got the impression that OpenCL was a good idea but its implementation ended up being significantly more complex than Cuda, and Cuda was surging ahead so much faster that the long-term viability of OpenCL was in question. I went with Cuda because it was simpler, and I felt like I was just writing temporary code that would have to be redesigned soon anyway.
Now, it looks like we will have to rewrite the GPGPU stuff, so this is a great time to re-evaluate my original decision. I don't know enough to about GPGPU programming to check my impressions, or to know whether things have changed. Two other options include adding a dependency on ViennaCL or CUDNN for our GPGPU needs. I usually avoid superfluous dependencies, but this might be a sufficiently special case to justify it.
We use Cuda right now for GPU parallelization, but OpenCL is more widely supported. Perhaps we should look into adding OpenCL support.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: