Can anyone realistically challenge Nvidia's monopoly on data science/AI hardware at this point? They're so far ahead of everyone else it's not even funny
Can anyone realistically challenge Nvidia's monopoly on data science/AI hardware at this point?
Can anyone realistically challenge Nvidia's monopoly on data science/AI hardware at this point? They're so far ahead of everyone else it's not even funny
no for training. yes for edge/inference. ryzen 7040, for example
>using GRAPHICS CARDS for AI
Is there like any ACTUAL AI hardware on the horizon?
yes, Apple M2 neural engine
>yes, Apple M2 neural engine
That's like saying the NPU built into Rockchip SOCs is a viable, competitive AI product.
If it doesn't scale, and it's not available outside of a consumer product, it doesn't count.
This, Apple could challenge NVIDIA but they are busy with their own business model.
Yea, they already lost to the H100 though.
It's coming soon. The idea of how AIs work has mostly been solved at this point. There's not much difference at this point, some are better than others but they're based on the same paper, more or less.
Now that we know it definitely has tangible use coupled with high demand, we'll get dedicated hardware for it soon. Microsoft in particular really wants this for next-gen PCs.
When it happens, it will result in GPU prices falling. I can imagine that PC motherboards one day will have a dedicated socket for these things. Much, much later down the road it might be integrated into CPU silicon.
The answer is FPGAs. AI is too broad a field for a one size fits all solution. FPGAs let you have application-specific hardware for every application.
>The answer is FPGAs
Wow, what a naive take. Have you priced FPGAs with a macrocell count useful to AI-type computations? They'll make Nvidia cards look cheap and good luck finding opensource tools to program them, as well as good luck even finding them in stock.
>I can imagine that PC motherboards one day will have a dedicated socket for these things
I think this will be the case as well. Vidya games with AI generative content on-the-fly will probably push a huge market for something like this.
Eventually the CPU, GPU and AI units will all come in a single package just like the upcoming Meteor Lake chips but with bigger GPU and AI chiplets.
>I can imagine that PC motherboards one day will have a dedicated socket for these things. Much, much later down the road it might be integrated into CPU silicon.
Surely PCIe slots would be enough..
Current AI tech is limited by the Von Neumann Bottleneck.
Hilariously techlet retardpost.
It's kind of retarded to design neural networks with centralised processing. The processing belongs finely distributed in memory, but inertia keeps things retarded for now.
Stop being clinically retarded anytime.
What paper?
NOVIDEO has had dedicated AI hardware in their GPUs for a while now.
NOVIDEO Hopper is not a GPU, it has no graphics hardware - just compute.
Not enough.
GPU prices will not fall because you can't even use consumer GPUs in production for CUDA - the EULA forbids it. It's fine for development and fucking around, but you will never get the VRAM that professional versions get.
FPGAs are too expensive, too inefficient, too hard to use and program for.
NOVIDEO won because of their software and the availability of compute hardware in ther consumer GPUs, competition can't compete.
>GPU prices will not fall because you can't even use consumer GPUs in production for CUDA - the EULA forbids it.
Nvidia will not last.
Trying to keep serverside is the way of the dodo.
They had a slump in revenue but are recovering nicely.
They will sell every single supercomputer they can make. They are totally independent in terms of hardware now (CPU, SoC, GPU, networking are all in-house). There isn't a single vendor like that bar maybe Intel, but they can't compete yet. Ponte Vecchio is a disaster and its flagship usage - the Aurora supercomputer is still not ready.
>the important problems require expensive servers
I'll take that bet and say no, actually.
A great example is global warming. Simulation finished. Yes, you are fat, quit eating so much. That will be $999 billion.
Literally every business disagrees, but you go you.
The beauty of NOVIDEO's solution is that it's not really bound to AI/ML but to general HPC so even if the fad fades away the hardware can still be used to whatever you want.
>Literally every business disagrees, but you go you.
Literally none of them have any ai successes :^)
Yeah, clearly all those hundreds of millions of dollars earned on this fad is not a "success".
yeeeessssssss? let's hear a success.
There's a reason AMD is betting on FPGAs for AI despite being the only other player in the CUDA game. Intel is going the FPGA route as well.
>FPGAs are too expensive, too inefficient, too hard to use and program for.
Clash exists, so too hard to program for is no longer an excuse.
computations are just math
all math is math
You don't need exact math for simulating brains.
a100 and h100s?
Congress will outlaw it because it's full of wokies and social cuntservatives who don't want people to have sex with language models. And because SAm alTmAN will convince them to let him build a monopoly.
But you're probably not thinking this. You probably want a hardware that you can purchase and put in your computer. For that, you're stuck with GPU for forseeable future.
analog processing like
https://mythic.ai/products/m1076-analog-matrix-processor/
or at least digital in memory processing
>space age
>heavy as an elephant
> Time travels into past to give his gay "warning" and not doing the dirty work himself
What a moron. Team openai all the way.
You can't just send yourself into the past, stupid. He utilized a small wormhole that was only stable enough to send a brief message before it collapsed.
Might you be a Time traveler?
AI/ML is a meme. It's more or less peaked
The real moat for nvidia isn’t their gpu specs, it’s their CUDA LIBRARIES that are integrated into every open source AI framework. If AMD put in the a little software development effort to make a drop in replacement for oyCUDA that works with their GPUs then they would have a fighting chance.
Or Intel could do it, or even crApple
AMD has already shown for a long time now that MI300 will be the same thing as grace but with ryzen cores instead of ARM. The problem is they get fucked by everyone else when it comes to software.
Look for example at pytorch:
>Cuda 12.1 released april 18th
Already had a nightly build for a few weeks now
>ROCM 5.5 released may 2nd
Torch said rocm 5.5 support soon about a month ago but they are still on 5.4
Arch took a 1week break from package building due to some move to github. Been a month, still no rocm 5.5 on arch. So yes, the fact that amd has only 10% of userbase fucks it simply because people that have the power to merge shit don't care about it and reply with "wtf is rocm?" "Sorry this works only on cuda".
But to get to your original question, MI300 is the same thing that Nvidia showed at computex but with Ryzen cores instead of ARM.
>AMD has already shown for a long time now that MI300 will be the same thing as grace but with ryzen cores instead of ARM.
The difference is that AMD has nothing like NVLINK, nor do they have 400/800 gbit/s networking. NV has everything ready and now, you truckload dollars and get a complete working system. Without having to wait for any system integrators.
>There's a reason AMD is betting on FPGAs for AI
It was announced over a year ago and nothing more is known yet.
Where's the tooling? Where's the libraries? Where's the software ecosystem? Without it it's just another proprietary DOA crap.
>despite being the only other player in the CUDA game.
That's not even true, if anything Intel is the other player because oneAPI is more advanced than anything AMD has. AMD's tooling is also atrocious in comparison, and always has been.
>Intel is going the FPGA route as well.
At least here the software is already available, and actually working. AMD has literally nothing.
>The difference is that AMD has nothing like NVLINK
They do, here's the user manual: https://www.amd.com/system/files/TechDocs/56978.pdf
>nor do they have 400/800 gbit/s networking
Their interconnect is fast enough for the fastest supercomputer in the world, that's good enough for me.
>Can anyone realistically challenge Nvidia's monopoly on data science/AI hardware at this point?
Tenstorrent or Google if sells TPUs clusters.
Every ASIC IA chip loss because optimize for narrow architectures like CNN or lack flexibility.
Tenstorrent do Custom Risc V cpus plus ASIC AI.
Google can optimize Deep Learning architectures for TPU systems.
Does Nvidia really have a monopoly though? Large segments of the AI training and inference market are already dominated by proprietary solutions. For example Google and Amazon have their own AI hardware that uses their own custom chip designs. Eventually a lot of AI work will be handled by ASICs and FPGAs just like what happened with crypto.
They're not even much ahead. The problem is cuda. All software depends heavily on it, including being extremely optimized for it and for nvidia hardware. If someone came up with optimized opencl kernels for amd gpus or something, you'd get the same performance and thus the same results. Except you can't just change frameworks overnight, their popularity leads them credence (you "know" the results they output is correct) in science and that if not, you can track what's wrong where and when, unlike on a no-name framework. You also can't easily add the code to shit like pytorch, because it means rewriting fucktons of shit just to provide full support, even though a lot of it is not necessary. Only when the software is there could people possibly consider AMD, and not this time around but the next time they refresh their hardware. And since nvidia is the safe choice, they'll go with it by default unless you prove amd is superior in some palpable way (e.g. you can train the same model in 1/2 the time, or you can train 10 such models on the same gpu at once without losing speed, or whatever).
This is the same as Proton vs Native linux games. There is no need to bother writing shitty inexperienced code specifically for AMD as rocm already handles cuda translation for AMD cards. Just write the software for cuda and it will work on AMD.
rocm is slow, buggy, and doesn't support everything.
Hardware does not work the same under the hood. you ALWAYS need hardware-specific optimizations at these levels.
I predict that open standards like OpenCL will take over, since heterogeny in the space ill be valued, and as the market gets bigger taking even a small slice of it will generate enough revenue to justify GPU R&D, and open source GPUS will be a thing eventually. if nvidia gives people any reason to ditch them that timeline will accelerate
Why would it be valued?
Why would opencl, which has already been deprecated, take over?
Are you retarded?
portability, for one. code to run on consumer hardware, write once run anywhere, flexability in vendors, etc. nvidia having a monopoly would let them charge higher prices, and so that creates motivation for competition. if moore's law dies on us anytime soon computer hardware will become comodified real fast
>Why would opencl, which has already been deprecated, take over?
I think vulkan's the new one, but I did a quick wikipedia check while I was writing that post, and vulkan looked to mostly be about graphicws and opencl was updated 6 months ago
That is the dumbest post I've ever seen anywhere on BOT, and I've been here since 2006. Holy hell what even is happening. Are you even a living being? Even a dog is smarter than that. What. The. FUCK.
>AD HOMINEM
moron
If you're not contributing to the discussion with actual arguments consider necking yourself
he means vulkan compute, he's just behind on the times. Also wrong, because no one will catch CUDA unless a state-level actor interferes.
So I guess that means OneAPI has a chance, but it's not actually open source so meh.
geopolitics is already driving countries to have in-house chip fabs for security reasons. since AI is the future of everything everyone's gonna want to be able to have their own fab so a diplomatic SNAFU or war won't cut them off. if for no other reason this will drive open standards and heterogeneity since those cards will need to be usable by the widest possible slice of use cases to make back the investment
also open hardware is a benefit, locked down/backdoored/etc. hardware can turn on governments and corporations just as easy as the end user and with a diverse global market it's easy to just buy the card that doesn't suck ass
Isnt geohotz tinygrad able to change it? Heard hes developing a framework called tinygrad to improve AMD cards for ML
What the fuck does AI even do except produce a bunch of worthless content to entertain morons?
>produce a bunch of worthless content to entertain morons?
but that's the whole tech sector
Deep learning is in everything you do. Your camera super resolution, your bank automatically reading your cheque numbers when you cash one in, modern bioinformatics tools, etc.
Just because you're tech illiterate and only become aware of things once it becomes entertainment doesn't mean "AI" was born yesterday.
>t. moron
>waaah mommy he said facts waaaaah
Tesla has their DOJO architecture
Google has some TPU
Tenstorrent is working on some, but they're smaller company.
Honestly, if I was a betting man, I'd go with Tesla as a dark horse as they have the machines necessary to scale up in consumer hardware (their robots and their cars allows them to sell millions of their chips potentially each year and possibly 10s of millions in few more years) and Google as potential to catch up. But Google maybe able to do one or two of exascale supercomputers
No, they've won and nothing will topple them until Intel comes up with something entirely out of left field that revolutionizes training and so on
How much does NVIDIA's AI revenue depend on Microsoft I wonder? ChatGPT which started this recent AI craze runs on Azure using Nvidia hardware but it seems all the other big potential AI customers like Google, Amazon and Tesla mainly use their own proprietary hardware. The need for AI hardware will certainly grow but will Nvidia have customers if all the big players are doing their own thing? TSMC should do well though barring an invasion since almost everyone depends on their chips.
nvidia's play is to capture the gaming market. nvidia sells ~25 million GPUs each year. nVidia's annual rev is only $27B and netincome of ~9.75B with ~37% profit margin. Tesla's annual was $81B with ~40-50% YOY growth. And their net income was $12.58B, a 15.5% profit margin. This year, Tesla's will be ~113B revenue and ~$17.5B net income.
Market is hoping other companies pick up drop what they're doing and pick up the nvidia GPU due to LLM, but they forget that everyone else is also in the game for a reason. Google is doing LLM of their own with their own TPUs. Microsoft will surely do their own thing. Apple will probably spin off their own LLM chip infrastructure. Tesla has been doing large NN chip for 1-2 years now. Scaling/optimizing as they go along, probably the most mature out of all the NN competitors, but its not out there for traditional computers, just on their cars/robots.
>Google is doing LLM of their own with their own TPUs
Wrong. It's a GCP pet project.
They've been forced into front stage due to OpenAI
Google AI? Yes, TPU no. No one cares about it, not even google.
These. I'm tired of techlets screaming about whatever the msm is shilling at the moment. Why is nuBOT like this anyway?
Huge money will be spent on AI. The problem for Nvidia is that the heaviest users of AI like Google will want to keep this money to themselves and build their own systems rather than give the cash to Nvidia.
TPUv4 is superior by far on any model with high activation sparsity (ie. Relu). Investors are throwing money at AI though and a lot of that money flows to NVIDIA.
Realistically, technological superiority doesn't really matter here.
i thought most entperise customers and super computers and shit run on linux which nvidia has shit drivers for. am i wrong?
yes
nvidia's drivers are good for cuda and other server shit
less good for actual desktop, but still fine unless you're trying bleeding edge wayland or expect VRR to work
You can simply protest by recording yourself throwing balloons full of seamen at nvidia gpu.
Don't tell the viewers it's cum to avoid getting deplatformed on YouTube
THE more you BUY THE more you save THE MORE YOU BUY THE MORE YOU SAVEEEE
THE more you BUY THE more you save THE MORE YOU BUY THE MORE YOU SAVEEEE
Why is rocm so shit? I can't believe that AMD is so gnomish and can't fix their own shit fast if they wanted.
Spend some millions in a dev team (with kernel devs involved) to fix rocm and this can be fixed in some months.
this
if AMD made ROCm not shit, then it'd be solid for some things
Sam Altman will be the bring the ruin of the free world.
Lisa Su is not an visionary, she just got lucky with Ryzen.
Of course not. I mean have you seen Jensen's jackets? They are all made of leather.
>1 exaflops
>144 TB VRAM
wow
although this means nothing if they're going to use retarded algos with quadratic complexity
Imagine the e-boi chatbots
*slaps U2 server* this baby can hold so many horny little anime girls
AMD's MI300 is significantly faster than anything Nvidia has on the market at the moment, the problem is that AMD doesn't have the software built out yet so the only entities interested are going to be Hyper Scalars.
The MI300 is a multi-chip APU and it's nowhere near out you dumb msm-lapping consooomer
The Grace super chip literally does the same thing but better and you can actually backorder it now. You just have to wait 6 months because of the order backlog
>M-MUH APU
literally of no significance. AMD's only customers are a handful of supercomputers that generate an amortized revenue of like $50M a year
Tenstorrent