My three NVIDIA cards are more power efficient than my one AMD card, both at idle and during usage.
Official ROCm is like pulling teeth with poor support for desktop cards. Debian, a volunteer led project, have better ROCm CI than AMD and support more cards.
Look at any benchmarks. NV midrange cards are faster than AMD and at least a generation in front. Owning a 7900XTX is an embarrassing disappointment.
I like AMD and want them to succeed, but they are way behind NV in this area.
> Official ROCm is like pulling teeth with poor support for desktop cards...
I agree with most of your post and fled the AMD ecosystem some time ago because of the machine learning situation, but their problem seemed to be more the firmware bugs and memory management of compute shaders than the higher level libraries.
The obvious solution to this one would be not to use ROCm. ROCm has always been a bit of a train wreck for small users and it doesn't seem to do anything special anyway. The way forward would be something more like Vulkan which the server that today's link points to seems to be using. The existence of a badly managed software package doesn't really imply that users have to use it, they can use an alternative.
It would be nice if AMD sorts themselves out though. The NVidia driver situation on linux is painful and if AMD can reliably run LLMs without the hardware locking then I'd much rather move back to using their products.
Yes, AMD themselves even use Vulkan tg numbers in their marketing material, because it's faster than ROCm on everything RDNA2 onwards (seems embarrassing).
However for pp, Vulkan is still nowhere near close to ROCm. That matters for long context and/or quick response. A lot of people really care about that time-to-first-token.
Have a Strix Halo 128 running Qwen 3.5 122b at 35t/s using Vulkan and kernel 7.0.0 on a 400w PSU. Pretty hard to beat for the price and power consumption IMO. But to be fair I compile everything myself so proprietary drivers required by nvidia are a non starter for me.
Whoever did this must have realised the users will hate it. So… is this just demonstrating that the internal culture emphasises other things than user happiness?
I also note that ”for PRs” - will we see these appearing as comments in generated code?
We also outlaw vices like physical violence and property theft.
Society is fundamentally counter to individual freedom, and the degree determines the nature of that society and the degree of cooperation possible within it.
Was thinking this as well. Not shocking though, the pundit class, of which Derek is a high-ranking member, is pretty unimaginative (in a way I imagine is deliberate)
This is naive. The people deciding about the bombing will profit most by taking a very large and unlikely position against the market’s predictions and then carrying it out immediately.
Anonymous trading on prediction markets leads to unpredictable chaos in the end. And as destruction is easier than creation that’s what we will see more of.
Example: a fake German market for train punctuality was announced to make a point recently. If it had been real, train staff and passengers could trivially have profited by betting against any expected punctual train and blocking a door for a few minutes. Or betting against many trains and throwing a hopefully fake body onto a busy line.
Having nice things in society is fragile and not a given. They mostly exist through mutual consent and mild disincentives to destroy the common good. Allow people to profit by destroying them and enough of them will.
I’ve been programming professionally for 25 years. Well, 24 really because in the whole last year I barely wrote a line myself but my output increased dramatically.
If you can’t see that it’s over, I’m not sure what to tell you. You will, in time.
The type of work matters and understanding how capital interacts with labor is something that hasn't really changed over the last 150 years (not the first time productivity tools have been introduced in capitalism).
All we are going to get is increased mass surveillance and molding software engineers into more assembly line work.
Both things do not sound good or reasonable nor wanted by a majority in our industry.
But sure! Being able to do more busy work is useful I guess, too bad the workers will never benefit from such a scheme; hopefully the masses don't overthrow the country, but I wouldn't blame them if they did.
+1, it feels very much like a case of _feeling_ more productive because you’re outputting more …stuff…, but IME, it’s easy to produce a lot of stuff that isn’t useful and just creates a productive vibe (pun intended)
Bit flips aren’t always bad hardware. I remember an anecdote from Sandia from my HPC days - they found they were getting more bit flips on some machines than others on their cluster and sometimes correlated.
Turned out at their altitude cosmic rays were flipping bits in the top-most machines in the racks, sometimes then penetrating lower and flipping bits in more machines too.
The proof is really in the pudding, isn't it? I don't see a wave of successful vibe-coded startups in the market yet. That's kind of the benchmark for whether this stuff actually does in practice what the AI-hypemen claim it can.
Rather the opposite. A vibe-coded startup cannot survive if it can be trivially duplicated. The proof will be in observing the inverse phenomenon; (pure) software companies disappearing.
It is still not clear to me. The periodicity of their orbit around the tree is the same. I think this is an instance of us meaning different things by “go around”
reply