On Wed, 10 Nov 2010 22:10:55 -0000, "Daniel White" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Tomasz and Andreas, > > Thanks both for the info. I've considered OpenCL, but from what I've > seen, it's
<CL myth debunking below> - not quite as mature as CUDA To make up for that, it avoids some of CUDA's design mistakes. (e.g. context as thread-global state) Also, the CL drivers have been through a few revisions, and they've come a long way. Lastly, CL builds on the same infrastructure as CUDA (in Nvidia's case) and thus benefits from CUDA's maturity where it matters most. - slower Not true. A colleague of mine (Tim Warburton) was able to get equivalent code running faster on CL than on CUDA, on the same hardware. (Perhaps the LLVM-based compiler is better? Who knows.) - more difficult to use If you compare the example programs at http://documen.tician.de/pyopencl/ and http://documen.tician.de/pycuda/ it's plain to see that that's not the case. > though that might have changed in these past few months). I love the > principle of the open standard. I just wish CUDA could become like that. > I may also hold off until Microsoft release their GPGPU language. MS have released a GPGPU language, it's called DirectCompute, and mainly for use with DirectX in games. (Were they planning on releasing another one?) I'm not meaning to tell you that you should use CL, I'm just trying to make sure you base your decision on accurate information. :) Andreas
pgpC0awuTsRCi.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ PyCUDA mailing list [email protected] http://lists.tiker.net/listinfo/pycuda
