Motherboards Memory Storage Cases/Cooling/PSUs IT Computing Displays Mobile Mac CPUs & Chipsets Video Digital Cameras Linux Gadgets Systems Trade Shows Guides Home Increase Font Size Decrease Font Size Change Page Size
The State of OpenCL & the First End-User OpenCL Drivers
The State of OpenCL & the First End-User OpenCL Drivers
Date: October 6th, 2009
Author: Ryan Smith
Buy the e-GeForce GeForce HDCP 8400 GS Card
Blank
 
 

Last week NVIDIA released their first set of end-user OpenCL drivers. Previously OpenCL drivers had only been available for developers on the NVIDIA side of things, and this continues to be the case on the AMD side of things. With NVIDIA’s driver release, the launch of AMD’s 5800 series, and some recent developments with OpenCL, this is a good time to recap the current state of OpenCL, and what has changed since our OpenCL introductory article from last year.

A CPU & GPU Framework

Although we commonly talk about OpenCL alongside GPUs, it’s technically a hardware agnostic parallel programming framework. Any device implementing OpenCL should be cable of running any OpenCL kernel, so long as the developers take in to account querying the host device ahead of time as to not spawn too many threads at once. And while GPUs (being the parallel beasts that they are) are the primary focus, OpenCL is also intended for use on CPUs and more exotic processors such as the Cell BE and DSPs.

What this means is that when it comes to discussing the use of OpenCL on computers, we have two things to focus on. Not only is there the use of OpenCL on the GPU, but there’s the use of OpenCL on CPUs. If Khronos has their way, then OpenCL will be a commonly used framework for CPUs both to take better advantage of multi-core CPUs (8 threaded i7 anyone?) and as a fallback mechanism for when OpenCL isn’t available on a GPU.

This also makes things tricky when it comes to who is responsible for what. AMD for example, in making both GPUs and CPUs, is writing drivers for both. They are currently sampling their CPU driver as part of their latest Stream SDK (even if it is a GPU programming SDK), and their entire CPU+GPU driver set has been submitted to the Khronos group for certification.

NVIDIA on the other hand is not a CPU manufacturer (Tegra aside), so they are only responsible for having a GPU OpenCL driver, which is what they have been giving to developers for months. They have submitted it to Khronos and it has been certified, and as we mentioned they have released it to the public as of last week. NVIDIA is not responsible for a CPU driver, and as such they are reliant on AMD and Intel for OpenCL CPU drivers. AMD likes to pick at NVIDIA for this, but ultimately it’s not going to matter once everyone finally gets up to speed.

Intel thus far is the laggard; they do not have an OpenCL implementation in any kind of public testing, for either CPUs or GPUs. For AMD GPU users this won’t be an issue, since AMD’s CPU driver will work on Intel CPUs as well. For NVIDIA GPU users with Intel CPUs, they'll be waiting on Intel for a CPU driver. Do note however that a CPU driver isn't required to use OpenCL on a GPU, and indeed we expect the first significant OpenCL applications to be intended to run solely on GPUs anyhow. So it's not a bad situation for NVIDIA, it's just one that needs to be solved sooner than later.

OpenCL ICD: Coming Soon

Unfortunately matters are made particularly complex by the fact that on Windows and Linux, writing an OpenCL program right now requires linking against a vendor-specific OpenCL driver. The code itself is still cross-platform/cross-device, but in terms of compiling and linking OpenCL has not been fully abstracted. It’s not yet at the point where it’s possible to write and run a single Windows/Linux program that will work with any OpenCL device. It would be the equivalent of requiring an OpenGL game (e.g. Quake) to have a different binary for each GPU vendor’s drivers.

The solution to this problem is that OpenCL needs an Installable Client Driver (ICD), just like OpenGL does. With an ICD developers can link against that, and it will handle the duties of passing things off to vendor-specific drivers. However an ICD isn’t ready yet, and in fact we don’t know when it will be ready. NVIDIA - who chairs the OpenCL working group - tells us that the WG is “driving to get an ICD implementation released as quickly as possible”, but with no timetable attached to that. The effort right now appears to be on getting more OpenCL 1.0 implementations certified (NV is certified, AMD is in progress), with an ICD to follow.

Meanwhile Apple, in the traditional Apple manner, has simply done a runaround on the whole issue. When it comes to drivers they shipped Snow Leopard with their own OpenCL CPU driver, and they have GPU drivers for both AMD and NVIDIA cards. Their OpenCL framework doesn’t have an ICD per-say, but it has features that allow developers to query for devices and use any they like. It effectively accomplishes the same thing, but it’s only of use when writing programs against Apple’s framework. But to Apple’s credit, as of this moment they currently have the only complete OpenCL platform, offering CPU+GPU development and execution with a full degree of abstraction.

What GPUs Will Support OpenCL

One final matter is what GPUs will support OpenCL. While OpenCL is based around the hardware aspects of DirectX10-class hardware, being DX10 compliant isn’t enough. Even among NVIDIA and AMD, there will be some DX10 hardware that won’t support OpenCL.

NVIDIA: Anything that runs CUDA will run OpenCL. In practice, this means anything in the 8-series or later that has 256MB or more of VRAM. NVIDIA has a full list here.

AMD: AMD will only be supporting OpenCL on the 4000 series and later. Presumably there was some feature in the OpenCL 1.0 specification that AMD didn’t implement until the 4000 series, which NVIDIA had since the launch of the 8-series. Given that AMD is giving Brook+ the heave-ho in favor of OpenCL, this will mean that there’s going to continue to be a limited selection of GPGPU applications that work on these cards as compared to the 4000 series and later.

End-User Drivers

Finally to wrap this up, we have the catalyst of this story: drivers. As we previously mentioned, NVIDIA released their OpenCL-enabled 190.89 drivers to the public last week, which we’re happy to see even if the applications themselves aren’t quite ready. This driver release was a special release outside of NVIDIA’s mainline driver releases however, and as such they’re already out of date. NVIDIA released their 191.07 WHQL-certified driver set yesterday, and these drivers don’t include OpenCL support. So while NVIDIA is shipping an OpenCL driver for both developers and end-users, it’s going to be a bit longer until it shows up in a regular release.

AMD meanwhile is still in a developer-only beta, which makes sense given that they’re still waiting on certification. The estimates we’ve heard is that the process takes a month, so with AMD having submitted their drivers early last month, they should be certified soon if everything went well.


66 Comments
Username:
Password:
linux support by haplo602, 45 days ago
currently Nvidia is the only vendor with good linux support for opengl/opencl. AMD is behind in opengl and very much non-existent for opencl.



Reply
RE: linux support by stmok, 45 days ago
The entire Linux graphics stack is being overhauled.

The current one has issues to address, and its the very reason why there's nothing like DXVA on Linux. Nvidia worked around this deficiency by coding their own approach...VDPAU. But this only works with Nvidia GF8 or newer cards and closed drivers.

Closed drivers mean Nvidia must keep up with Kernel and Xorg versions. If they don't, you are at their whim and have to wait. If they choose to drop support for a specific era of hardware, you are SOL.

Right now, Linux is gradually moving to the new stack. This is going to take time and cause pain to some users. (As infrastructure changes often do)...But the benefit is that things like HD playback accelerated and OpenCL will be supported in the long run. Features won't be hardware brand specific like VDPAU is...So far, there's very raw code for OpenCL support in the new stack. (Someone has started something, but its not really usable...More like an initial thing to see if its feasible.)

As for AMD, the greatest thing they've done was release the documentation specs for open driver development. Right now; 2D and X-Video is done for all Radeons up to 4xxx series; with power saving (PowerPlay) and 3D features being worked on...They "kind of work", but are really buggy.

Overall, if you need 3D acceleration now, you have no choice but to use Nvidia cards and closed drivers.

In the long run (5 yrs+ away?), Radeon's may have the advantage of having open driver support. ie: Radeons will work out-of-the-box without too much fuss. One less step in setting up a Linux box.

Reply
RE: linux support by Deanjo, 44 days ago
Wow, talk about a epic failure of understanding what vdpau is.

vdpau, is NOT vender specific. It is a freely open standard that other graphic venders are free to implement as well in their drivers support either through native driver solution or through use of a wrapper. vdpau is a API. vdpau is not isolated to nvidia cards as well. The S3's chrome 5 series for example has native vdpau support.

http://drivers.s3graphics.com/en/download/drivers/chrome5x-Linux/RN_Linux_EN.txt

In fact it is now part of freedesktop.

http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg-announce/2009-September/001036.html

Saying vdpau is "vendor specific" is nothing but pure BS. You might as well say openCL is "vendor specific" as well by your definition of "vendor specific" since they are the only ones right now with openCL support in their drivers.

Reply
RE: linux support by stmok, 44 days ago
Well, if I'm wrong I apologize. But there's no need to act like a dick about it.

How hard is it to politely correct someone Deanjo? Apparently in your case, too hard.



Reply
RE: linux support by jackylman, 42 days ago
I'm using ATI's open-source 3D right now on a RadeonHD 4000 card. I don't find it buggy (runs compiz, googleearth, some games).

Depending on your level of 3D need, closed-source drivers are no longer the only choice.

Reply
What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 45 days ago
You don't need CPU-drivers for OpenCL. All you need is nVidia's GPU-accelerated OpenCL drivers, and you're up and running.
So the current status is like this:
- People with an nVidia card will be able to run OpenCL by installing the proper drivers (version 190.89 currently).
- People with anything other than an nVidia card can currently only run a CPU-based OpenCL implementation. AMD currently supplies a CPU implementation in their Stream beta SDK, which works on both AMD and Intel CPUs, although obviously it was aimed at AMD CPUs. Intel currently hasn't released anything, not even in beta.
There's also some OpenCL support in the works with the opensource Mesa/Gallium3D project.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 45 days ago
By the way, the missing feature in pre-4000 series GPUs from AMD is shared memory.
Pre-4000 series GPUs also won't be able to use DirectCompute, even with CS4.x downlevel. Again nVidia's 8-series and higher will all support DirectCompute CS4.0.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by bobvodka, 45 days ago
Unfortunately, it's the SM5.0 profile which has the more useful things in it, such as the Interlock functions which (as I understand it) don't work on SM4.0 hardware when it comes to DirectCompute.

From a gaming devs point of view these are pretty vital for various processes (such as single pass luminance or single pass deferred lighting), which imo reduces the usefulness of DirectCompute on anything pre-SM5.0, certainl in the games sphere.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
I don't think so, to be honest. Why would you need interlocking for deferred lighting?
It is unfortunate though that there is no interlocking support in CS4.0, since only the original G80 series doesn't support it. G92 and later do have interlocking and various other additions which aren't exposed through OpenCL or DirectCompute.

You actually see complaints about DirectCompute in the nVidia GPU Computing SDK, such as:
// Notice: In CS5.0, we can output up to 8 RWBuffers but in CS4.x only one output buffer is allowed,
// that way we have to allocate one big buffer and manage the offsets manually. The restriction is
// not caused by NVIDIA GPUs and does not present on NVIDIA GPUs when using other computing APIs like
// CUDA and OpenCL.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by bobvodka, 44 days ago
For single pass Interlock functions are used to work out the depth of a "tile" for processing and accumalate which lights are effecting that "tile" before performing the lighting resolve.

Granted, the process could be carried out without such things, it would probably require more passes however and generally be less efficient.



Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
Depth of a tile? Are you now confusing tile-based rendering with deferred rendering, not to mention confusing compute shaders with conventional rendering techniques?
And even then, I still don't see why interlock functions would be required.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by bobvodka, 43 days ago
No, I'm not confusing anything, it was an idea put forward by Johan Andersson of DICE at the Siggrap 09 conference.

You do the standard deferred rendering step for creating a g-buffer
Then you dispatch compute shaders in blocks of 16 pixels aka a 'tile'
Each thread then retrieves the z depth for its pixel from a g-buffer; interlockMin and interlockMax at then used to obtain the min/max z for that block of pixels
The compute shader then goes on to calculate which lights intersect this 'tile' given the extents and min/max data (processing 16 lights at once)
The light count is increased using an interlockAdd for each intersecting light and the light index is stored in a buffer
Finally, the compute shader goes back to pixel processing, where each thread in the group sums the lighting for its pixel and writes out the final data.

No confusion at all and a good example of how a compute shader can be used to calculate and output graphics.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 43 days ago
It's just one very specific example. It's a gross over-generalization to say that anything lower than CS5.0 is useless for graphics based on this single example.
In fact, your entire hypothesis is wrong. You go from "If CS5.0 can do it better, CS4.x is useless".
The correct hypothesis would ofcourse be "If CS4.x can do better than using only conventional geometry/vertex/pixelshaders, then CS4.x is useful".

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by bobvodka, 43 days ago
I never said CS4.x was 'useless' I just said that due to the lack of Interlock functionality its usefullness was reduced.

Will it have some uses? Of course, and I dare say it will allow some cool things to be done, however when compared to CS5.0 profiles with, in perticular, the Interlock stuff then some things become harder to do or indeed impossible in a single pass. (see previous example).

I agree that its unfortunate that the CS4.0 profile doesn't support Interlock, but I guess they had to draw the line somewhere.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 43 days ago
Yea well, I just think you have an odd perspective.
Obviously CS5.0 is better, and obviously DICE wanted to promote the new DirectX 11 features.
Bottom line is however that we've not had CS at ALL yet, in DirectX, even though there's a huge installed base of DX10 cards capable of CS4.0 or CS4.1. There isn't a lot of DX11 hardware out there yet.
Therefore in the short term CS4.x is going to be the more interesting one, as it allows you to implement new functionality like realtime tessellation, physics etc, or to make more efficient implementations of existing technologies like post-processing/SSAO and all that. CS4.x is just a nice shot in the arm for all that DX10 hardware out there.

On another note, you also have to put CS5.0 into perspective. Interlock makes it easy to code certain things a certain way, but it's no guarantee that it will also be efficient. That depends largely on how the hardware implements interlocking. Think back to the conditional branching that was introduced in PS3.0 for example. In many cases it was actually faster to just use a multipass algorithm using alphatest, which only required PS2.0, simply because the branching itself wasn't implemented in a very efficient way, unlike alphatesting.

So while the DICE solution looks nice and efficient, it doesn't necessarily have to be all that much faster than a more bruteforce multipass algorithm. In fact, if I had to choose, I'd rather implement a CS4.0 algorithm that improves performance on all DX10 (and DX11) hardware, than to go for a CS5.0 algorithm that doesn't work on DX10 hardware, and may only be marginally faster than a CS4.0 algorithm on DX11 hardware (which is already the fastest hardware on the market anyway, so it's not the hardware that needs the performance increase most anyway).

If you want a nice case, look at PhysX. It even runs on the G80 architecture, which doesn't support interlocking. So there's great things you can do with compute shaders without interlocking. It would be very nice if developers would use CS4.0 for such physics effects.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by JarredWalton, 45 days ago
"For NVIDIA GPU users with Intel CPUs, they'll be waiting on Intel for a CPU driver. Do note however that a CPU driver isn't required to use OpenCL on a GPU, and indeed we expect the first significant OpenCL applications to be intended to run solely on GPUs anyhow. So it's not a bad situation for NVIDIA, it's just one that needs to be solved sooner than later."

OpenCL has both CPU and GPU implementations, so if you want a fully utilized system with OpenCL you need to have CPU and GPU drivers. At least, that's how I understand it, and of course near-term the GPU driver is going to prove more important than the CPU driver.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
I just think it's a very confusing thing to write. It shouldn't even have been mentioned in the first place.

Firstly, obviously nVidia doesn't need to provide a CPU driver, since that's the job of the CPU manufacturer. Just like nVidia doesn't need to provide a GPU driver for AMD hardware either.

Secondly, there's absolutely no need to have a "fully utilized system" with both CPU and GPU drivers. As you say yourself, the CPU driver isn't going to be important.

Thirdly, AMD never said anything about nVidia not having a CPU driver. The point with AMD (which is REALLY lame) is that they keep pretending that nVidia doesn't support OpenCL at all, and that nVidia is only pushing its proprietary C for Cuda and PhysX standards, so AMD is trying to look like the 'good guy', while in reality nVidia is the one offering OpenCL support (not to mention that AMD also tried a proprietary standard first, but only nVidia actually managed to get some software support with their proprietary technology). In fact, AMD even claimed that they were the first to support DirectCompute with the launch of the HD5870 (if they added CS5.0 to the statement they would be right, but they didn't). This is also not true, since nVidia has supported DirectCompute since the first 190-release drivers in July, months before the HD5870 was launched.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Zool, 44 days ago
First nvidias drivers are for gt200 and lower and just gpu-s so its no reason for nvidia not to hawe drivers first.
Second amd-s new gpu had come out this month so its obvious that they waited with the drivers so they hawe everything in one.
Also they hawe cpu+gpu support and i think they prepared it with CPU and GPU merge in mind later on.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
AMD still doesn't have GPU drivers for OpenCL at all.
And they currently only support DirectCompute on the HD5800-series. The 4000-series should also support DirectCompute CS4.1, but no drivers in sight.
There's no reason for AMD to delay 4000-series support for newer hardware. And there's even less reason for AMD not to support them even after releasing newer GPUs.
Apparently nVidia supports their existing customers much better. They too have a new GPU upcoming, but that didn't stop them from supporting all their existing customers, all the way back to the 3-year old 8800-series. AMD 'only' has to support the 4000-series, as the other hardware isn't capable anyway, but still, nothing.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Zool, 44 days ago
Testing and certificating drivers takes quite a time. I dont see to much reason to make them first for 4k series than cpu-s and than also for the whole 5K series (which is actualy quite more cards than 5870 and 5850).
It would make much more sense to make it at once. Which nvidia also did but with the 1 year old GPU as their latest.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
Yes, testing and certifying drivers takes time. That's no excuse though, is it? nVidia has to go through the same process, and nVidia actually supports 3 major series of GPUs (G80, G92 and GT200) in their drivers, AMD only has to do two (RV770 and RV870).

Besides, especially in the case of OpenCL, that has NOTHING to do with new GPUs. The OpenCL project started a long time ago, and AMD promised us drivers in the first half of 2009.
And even now that their new GPU is on the market, there STILL aren't any OpenCL drivers. AMD just failed to deliver on their promises.

And if I owned an HD4870, what do I care about the new GPU? Why should I wait? I just want the OpenCL support that AMD promised me. Especially when AMD shouts their mouth off about OpenCL and GPU-accelerated physics in the press. nVidia owners don't even NEED to wait for OpenCL, because they can already get accelerated physics and such through Cuda. Yet they get OpenCL before AMD owners do aswell. AMD should stop marketing vapourware and start supporting their customers.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Amiga500, 44 days ago
I think its a fair guess to say you are affiliated with Nvidia.


It'll come in time. I for one, would rather wait a bit for drivers that encompass both the CPU and GPU.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
Nope, completely wrong guess.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Titanius, 44 days ago
If I had to take a guess at it, you are SiliconDoc the annoying commentor from the Fermi article with a different name and using less caps locks...did you finally calm down?

Oh and BTW, WE DON'T CARE who came out first with the drivers, they will eventually both have it.

My understanding of AMD's lateness to the "party" is because they were busy launching the HD5xxx series cards and didn't have the same "free" time on their hands as NVIDIA has with their phantom GT300/Fermi release (I'm saying phantom because it has been talked about but there is no final product in testing (I don't refer to the first silicons of a new product as final).

NVIDIA came first for OpenCL, but AMD came first for DirectX 11, GET OVER IT!

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Maian, 44 days ago
I doubt it. Scali sounds like a developer anxious to develop OpenCL apps for whatever purpose and possibly doesn't care about DX11 at all (e.g. not developing a game/gfx acceleration or targeting non-Windows platform). If I were in his shoes, I too would annoyed at AMD, since they're "blocking" access to a substantial marketshare of GPUs with their late drivers. As a developer myself, I don't give a shit about which vendor is better - I care about what features I can play with and how much hardware in the market will support those features.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by dragonsqrrl, 44 days ago
Scali sounds like someone who is interested in GPGPU computing, more specifically wide opencl support across a mature platform, which opens up the GPU for applications other then gaming, definitely not like the scathing often misinformed comments of SiliconDoc. And you're making the argument that it doesn't matter who's first to support knew technologies, after you criticize Nvidia's "phantom GT300/Fermi" announcement for being late, and at the same time sympathizing with AMD's first to dx11 HD5870 launch? You're comment ended up sounding a lot more like SiliconDoc then then anything Scali wrote.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Titanius, 43 days ago
You are a bit naive and you obviously cannot read between the lines. I didn't praise anyone, hell if I use your argument that I praised someone, that would mean I praised AMD for their first to market DX11 cards and NVIDIA for their first to market OpenCL drivers, I did neither. I simply mentioned facts and how irrelevant this argument about AMD being late to the game is compared to NVIDIA also being late in another regard. If you don't understand that, well you're a lost cause.

As for mentioning the "phantom Fermi" comment, I am sorry you can't comprehend sarcasm. I'll stop making too much sense in the future.

But the point of my comment stands, GET OVER IT!

BTW, regarding Scali and SiliconDoc, they are both using the same type of argument and don't seem to stop arguing when everyone is trying to smarten them up, that is where I saw the similarity. As for me, I know when to stop...unlike some people.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by tamalero, 44 days ago
I'm the only one that seen the news about Fermi board mockup that wasnt even a real Fermi board in the first place?
talk about vaporware o_O

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Ryan Smith, 44 days ago
Jarred already said most of what I want to say, but I will add something.

It may be a confusing thing to write, but I consider it a critical point none the less. From what we're seeing out of the Apple developer camp, OpenCL is going to be big on the CPU. It won't be as big as it is on the GPU (no one is going to write something in OpenCL that they only intend to run on x86 processors), but big none the less.

In the mean time we have this crazy situation where you need drivers from multiple sources in many cases to get a complete driver stack. And even with drivers, it's all a mess without the ICD.

My fundamental point right now is that in spite of having a complete spec and certification, the OpenCL situation is very, very screwed up on Windows and Linux. When most of my time talking to contacts is composed of them trying to answer "who is responsible for what", there's a problem.

For OpenCL to succeed there needs to be full GPU and CPU drivers for all platforms, and an ICD to tie them together. We're not there yet.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
Why is that a crazy situation?
The same goes with OpenGL or Direct3D. You can have multiple devices, even from multiple vendors, and just enumerate through all of them.
You will ALWAYS have to have drivers from multiple sources, the ICD won't solve that. Even though AMD and Intel might package both their CPU and GPU drivers into a single downloadable package, they will STILL be two independent implementations, and two independent drivers. So from a technical point-of-view, it doesn't really matter whether CPU and GPU drivers come from the same manufacturer or not.

I suppose the best solution would be for Microsoft to offer CPU drivers through Windows Update. They already deliver GPU drivers through Windows Update, so eventually those will be updated to drivers with OpenCL support. If they also solve the CPU-part of the equation, the end-user doesn't even have to know about OpenCL.

Thing is that you make it sound like it's somehow nVidia's fault or responsibility to supply CPU drivers, and that's very confusing (and AMD has never said anything of the sort either).

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by tweakoz, 44 days ago
>>You will ALWAYS have to have drivers from multiple sources, the >>ICD won't solve that.

Yeah, but right now I have to link my OpenCL/Windows program with either the ATI Stream SDK, OR the NVIDIA OpenCL SDK. I can not do both (unless I do a plugin OpenCL driver layer for my program, thats a PITA I don't want to deal with).

The ICD, with enumeration of installed drivers built in is CRITICAL for developers ease of use.

mtm

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
Technically you don't.
As long as you link to 'a' OpenCL.dll, it should be fine.
The problem here is that AMD uses a nonstandard calling convention in their OpenCL.dll. That's why linking to their stuff doesn't work for nVidia and vice versa.
nVidia uses the same standard as Microsoft uses, and also OpenGL and OpenAL use, so I think AMD is the one who made a mistake here.
If AMD had used the same standard calling convention, we wouldn't have this problem. Then all functions could just be automatically imported by name.
Besides, the ICD won't solve this problem. The calling convention that AMD uses also has caller stack cleanup, rather than callee stack cleanup. You'd get stack corruption. They just need to fix and recompile their code.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by tweakoz, 31 days ago
What if you are trying to use multiple devices (from different vendors) simulultaneously?

mtm

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 30 days ago
That's the only time when you'll need to have an ICD.
However, in most cases just a single device will be fine. Developers or end-users wanting to use OpenCL on a single GPU (or a set of GPUs from the same vendor) is by far the most common scenario.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by drmo, 44 days ago
"In fact, AMD even claimed that they were the first to support DirectCompute with the launch of the HD5870 (if they added CS5.0 to the statement they would be right, but they didn't). "

Most of the releases and news reports I read specifically said the first WHQL certified DirectX 11 and DirectCompute 11 driver, not that they were the first with DirectCompute.

http://www.amd.com/us/press-releases/Pages/amd-press-release-2009sep22.aspx

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 44 days ago
I'm talking about statements like here:
http://www.hpcwire.com/topic/developert...Review-by-Standards-Body-60000452.html

"•AMD's upcoming next generation ATI Radeon family of DirectX 11 enabled graphics processors are expected to be the first to support accelerated processing on the GPU through DirectCompute."

This statement was made in late September, while nVidia already released WHQL drivers with DirectCompute in July:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/win7_winvista_32bit_190.38_whql.html
"Supports Microsoft’s new DirectX Compute API on Windows 7."

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by drmo, 37 days ago
I read that to mean that they are the first with DirectX 11 GPUs that support DirectCompute. It seems that later press releases have made it more clear that they meant DirectCompute 11.


Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 37 days ago
I don't see how you can read it to mean that. You *know* that's what it's supposed to mean if you are up to speed with the subject... but if you don't, there's no way you could read it like that, because a key piece of information was simply omitted from that statement.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by drmo, 37 days ago
Not really, after "first", you are assuming it should have GPU, whereas the subject was "DirectX 11 enabled graphics processors". However, I agree it is not absolutely clear, but I don't think it was purposeful, since the subsequent press releases clarified the statement.

Reply
RE: What's this nonsense about nVidia owners having to wait for Intel? by Scali, 37 days ago
"AMD's upcoming next generation ATI Radeon family of DirectX 11 enabled graphics processors are expected to be the first to support accelerated processing on the GPU through DirectCompute."

"The first" refers back to "AMD's upcoming next generation ATI Radeon family of DirectX 11 enabled graphics processors".
That part is very clear.

The problem is with this: "accelerated processing on the GPU through DirectCompute."

Your suggestion doesn't make sense...
You would get:
"AMD's upcoming next generation ATI Radeon family of DirectX 11 enabled graphics processors are expected to be the first family of DirectX 11 enabled graphics processors to support accelerated processing on the GPU through DirectCompute."
(Note that 'first' now takes on a slightly different meaning, the function of the word in the sentence changes).
What you have now is a kind of pleonasm. Since AMD's GPUs are the first DX11 GPUs, they are obviously the first DX11 GPUs to support whatever feature.
I'm sure that's not what they meant to say. It's just too far-fetched.

Reply
AMD's drivers by bobvodka, 45 days ago
I would suspect that, iff everything goes well, we can expect OpenCL support in the next driver drop from AMD which is more than likely going to be earlyish this month (I would suspect at the latest just before the Win7 launch date).

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by Scali, 44 days ago
I doubt that, really.
I don't think Khronos will even have it tested by that time, they took more than a month on nVidia's drivers aswell. Which means that they'd be through the tests in late October (they were sent to Kronos on the 21st of September).
Also, nVidia kept the drivers in beta another 3 months, before making it a first public release, and they haven't put them in the official driver release yet (as the article says, 190.89 supports it, but the recently released 191.07 doesn't yet).
I would think that AMD will also keep the drivers in beta for a while, even if they do pass OpenCL-conformance testing. After all, that only proves that the OpenCL portion works, it doesn't prove that the drivers as a whole work. They'd still need to be tested for regular functionality and pass WHQL. They'd also have to be merged back into the main release tree, as they'll be a few months behind regular releases by this time (just like nVidia released a new driver a few days ago still without OpenCL).

So no, I don't expect OpenCL drivers this month, probably not even next month.

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by bobvodka, 44 days ago
Hmmm, you raise good points there.

My 'this month' thing mostly depended on them submitting the OpenCL stuff for certaificantion early last month.

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by drmo, 37 days ago
Sorry, they were released today: Oct 13.

http://developer.amd.com/GPU/ATISTREAMSDKBETAPROGRAM/Pages/default.aspx

Granted, it is beta, but let us not try to make predictions when we don't really know what we are talking about.

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by Scali, 37 days ago
My prediction still stands, I don't think the OpenCL driver will be in this months Catalyst release, or in next month's.

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by drmo, 37 days ago
I don't see why they would release them in the Catalyst drivers until there are actual applications to use OpenCL. It wasn't clear to me that you were referring to an official Catalyst release.

I think Nvidia is at pretty much the same point (but having released them earlier (about 2 weeks)) with beta drivers released. Has Nvidia put them in their official public release? I don't even know why they would do so, with no programs to use it; it would just make the download larger.

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by Scali, 37 days ago
"Also, nVidia kept the drivers in beta another 3 months, before making it a first public release, and they haven't put them in the official driver release yet (as the article says, 190.89 supports it, but the recently released 191.07 doesn't yet).
I would think that AMD will also keep the drivers in beta for a while, even if they do pass OpenCL-conformance testing."

I think it was pretty clear...

And nVidia's drivers aren't beta anymore. They're a public release, just not the main release. The 190.89 drivers were beta for a number of weeks, available to registered developers, before they made them public.
It seems the same goes for AMD now. They're in the SDK beta 4, but you can only download them after you're registered as a developer.

And it's a chicken-and-egg problem. As a developer I find it very important that they release public drivers ASAP, because I want to know what drivers my software is expected to run on. Drivers first, applications later. It doesn't work the other way around.
I can't release applications if users need to register as developers with their IHV, and then download a beta SDK just to run my application. I also cannot guarantee that my application will run with future updates to the beta SDK/drivers.
Besides, don't forget that running beta drivers will also impact performance, stability and compatibility with other software. I cannot recommend end-users to run beta drivers rather than the official supported drivers.

So plenty of reasons to put them in the official release, no reasons not to (unless you want to sabotage the adoption of OpenCL).

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by drmo, 37 days ago
According to people who have downloaded them, they are labeled as Catalyst 9.11 RC, which suggests they could be released in November. Thank you for clarifying; I'm not a developer, so I didn't really consider the implications for developers. Looking on Nvidias website, I didn't see the download for the 190.89 drivers, so I thought those were a beta as well.

Reply
RE: AMD's drivers by Scali, 2 days ago
Well, the 9.11 drivers are released, but I haven't seen any mention of OpenCL in the release notes.

Reply
Development Tools? by mfago, 45 days ago
Anyone have any experience with development tools for CUDA/OpenCL? The (Anandtech) Fermi article mentions Visual Studio integration is coming -- how about something similar on Linux? Any experience with the current NVidia OpenCL profiler, or know of something (perhaps $$$) that is even better?

Thanks!
- Matt

Reply
Comments Page 1 of 2





AnandTech.com Blog Categories
All categories
Anand's Macdates
Anand's Theater Construction
Anand's Updates
Cases and Power Supplies
CeBIT 2008
CES 2008
Computex 2009
Derek Decanted
Eddie's Got Game
Gary's First Looks
IT Computing general
Jarred's Musings
Kris's Corner
Raja's Ramblings
Rob's Experiences...
Ryan's Ramblings
Virtualization
What's New with Wes
Blank
Blank

Blank

Latest news by
DailyTech

 November 20, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank

 November 19, 2009

Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank
Blank


more Blogs Discussions



pipeboost
Copyright © 1997-2009 AnandTech, Inc. All rights reserved. Terms, Conditions and Privacy Information.
Click Here for Advertising Information