What is Digg?Sponsored by Sony Pictures
Do you believe the 2012 Mayan Prophecy? view!
whowillsurvive2012.com - The Mayan Calendar predicts the end of time: 2012. See the trailer for 2012, opening November 13.
49 Comments
- ThantiK, on 12/10/2008, -1/+17For those who want it explained in simple terms...
OpenCL is Apple/Intel's answer for Nvidia's CUDA.
It allows the use of the processing power from your video card to be used in general-purpose computing. Its strong point is number-crunching. - RoboDonut, on 12/10/2008, -0/+13I wouldn't call it an "answer" to anything. That sounds way too combative.
It's an open standard API. No programmer wants to write five different implementations of everything (one for CUDA, one for CTM, one CPU-only, etc.)
This is in everybody's best interest. - sjmulder, on 12/10/2008, -1/+9Or something like Windows Parallel Processing Foundation.
- RoboDonut, on 12/10/2008, -0/+8You're thinking of a small subset of standards called "de facto" standards, or standards which have gained their status through widespread acceptance.
Things can become standardized through many other means. In this case, we have a great big group of industry giants (Apple, Nvidia, ATI, Intel, and the rest of the Khronos group) who all contributed to, and agreed upon, a definition for a new language that addresses a number of issues with developing GPGPU applications. Both ATI and Nvidia are abandoning their current GPGPU efforts in favor of this new language. There's no way you can argue that this isn't a standard. - aenegeling, on 12/10/2008, -0/+7book him boys..
- mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -1/+8@jakem1 RE : " Apple aren't the only ones working on this sort of thing and their version is no more official than anyone elses. "
Apple's version?
Why do you post on a subject you know nothing about?
This is an open cross platform specification that involves Intel and 20 other partner companies.
The only thing Apple are doing is agreeing to support it in their new upcoming release of OSX.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/21/opencl-spec-get ...
... Intel's Tim Mattson saying that Apple's decision to "support it in Snow Leopard was a huge plus to us ... " - ArcheKlaine, on 12/10/2008, -0/+7Why?
Windows 7 apps can use it too.
Sounds like good news for all computer users. - SawButter, on 12/10/2008, -4/+11MS have always been imposing their own copycat versions of new promising technologies.
Do you think they will change their policy from now on?
OpenCL is just another threat for MS, just like OpenGL, Java, Flash... are.
By the way, time will tell. - mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -0/+6@ThantiK RE: " This seems like a way for people to get around having to license CUDA for any kind of serious applications. "
Yeah, it DOES look like that... except for the fact that the standards overseer for OpenCL is the Khronos Group... and that the group's chief happens to be Neil Trevett, an NVIDIA executive... - drlha, on 12/10/2008, -0/+6ZippyV: Why don't you read the ***** article? Apple did not make this by themselves, they just happen to be implementing it in Snow Leopard. There is a large industry group behind OpenCL.
Also Leopard has OpenMP support build in already, and Apple have been implementing parellel computing in their OS's for a while now (Xgrid for example). OpenCL is different from OpenMP. - mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -0/+5@RoboDonut RE: " They're [ NVIDIA ] are pretty much stuck supporting CUDA, at least for a little while. "
Looks like you're right, and that nvidia are putting their weight behind OpenCL.
Especially since the standards overseer for OpenCL is the Khronos Group... and that the group's chief happens to be Neil Trevett, an NVIDIA executive... - RoboDonut, on 12/10/2008, -0/+5I've been waiting for this. There's a little project I've been working on that could make use of the performance benefits that GPGPU technology would offer, however I've been holding off until now because I didn't want to write the same code for each GPGPU API or lock my program into hardware from a specific vendor. Best of all, it's based on C99, which is one of my favorite languages.
Now we just need a working implementation of it. - mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -1/+6@ jakem1 RE: " Sure, OpenCL is a standard but that's meaningless unless it's widely used.
When DirectX 11 is released it's parallel processing will be ... in use on most computers. "
You really should qualify that statement with " DirectX 11 will be in use on just those computers running Windows".
There will be NO scientific & engineering based workstations running *nix based OS (Linux distros, BSD, OSX, etc ) running DirectX 11 for parallel processing...
It's OpenCL all the way for *nix based systems. - inactive, on 12/10/2008, -0/+4It's just that, usually people on Digg give better and more succinct answers than the articles. And look you even provided some insight.
- tama00, on 12/10/2008, -2/+6Just shows how many people dont read the article on digg.
"OpenCL provides programmers tools to speed up a wide variety of applications by taking advantage of untapped GPU processors and multi-core processors found in modern computers."
This is going to appear in the new MacOSX called snow leopard. This technology is pretty much the way of the future in other words as most applications today dont use both cores of your new core2duo processor nor do they harness the power of how powerful graphics cards are today with this they will be able to increase performance! - Myztry, on 12/10/2008, -1/+5It's good to see that they are all finally realizing that a GPU is another processor, that can be utilized as a co-processor just like the Amiga blitter was decades ago.
Anyway, one thing that baffles me is, why aren't they utilizing the excess RAM on video cards for general system wide read only caching.
Here we are with all these high-end systems spending a lot of time on the desktop, and often having up to a gig of non-paging memory sitting just the other side of the PCI-E bus. Must better suited for drive read-ahead than systems like USB based 'ready boost' - leuksho, on 12/10/2008, -0/+4Yea, after reading some of the comments on the last article posted, I feel as if some users missed the point. It's a great advantage on Apple's part and will be for some time, but the fact that it's "open" will mean that it can be used for different platforms, not just OS X.
You can't judge an OS when it has not been released yet unless you're using a beta right now or work for Apple or MS. In my opinion from what I have seen thus far, both OS's are offering some good features. - mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -3/+6@ SawButter RE: " MS have always been imposing their own versions of new promising technologies.
Do you think they will change their policy from now on?
OpenCL is just another threat for MS, just like OpenGL, Java, etc. "
You're absolutely right. If Microsoft were to "adopt" OpenCL it would only be to create a "new improved proprietary MS OpenCL".
MS would most probably call it " DirectXclosedCL "... - RoboDonut, on 12/10/2008, -0/+3I don't mean that they were going to stop supporting CUDA altogether.
They're pretty much stuck supporting CUDA, at least for a little while. I just don't see them making any radical improvements to it, as it would be a waste of resources. - inactive, on 12/10/2008, -3/+5What's OpenCL?
- 2Bnor2B, on 12/10/2008, -0/+2Yes, but it is Apple who decides what cards will be incorporated in their Pro configurations. You do not think that Apple sits around waiting for the video manufactures to write drivers before they decide to incorporate a card in their system. Currently they support 2600, 8800 and Quartra (older generation). These are dinosaurs, current cards are 10-15x faster then the 8800. The truth is that Apple does not care about accelerated cards. When researching the Mac Pro to replace my gaming system I discovered that OS X does not take advantage of crossfire to speed up their graphics with single displays, it is only advantageous when you have more then 2 displays. Hopefully with OpenCl we will see a better use of Crossfire or the newer Pros (i7) will support Crossfire/SLI. The Pro is a work of art, but Apple users will not see improvements to their acceptance in gaming until Jobs gets more aggressive in selecting performance video cards and encouraging manufactures to write drivers.
- InorganicMatter, on 12/10/2008, -1/+3Did you read the article!? It IS a standard now, hence the word "standardization." Expect rapid adoption in all operating systems now that it's officially standardized.
- ThantiK, on 12/10/2008, -1/+3But that's exactly what it is. It IS combative. That was the whole point of developing, supporting it and declaring it a "standard". Lets face it, CUDA isn't everyones cup of tea. But - Nvidia was way ahead of everyone in getting something out there, and it was out there months ahead of anyone thinking about OpenCL.
This seems like a way for people to get around having to license CUDA for any kind of serious applications.
I'm all for free as in beer. I'm all for standards. But I have a feeling this will be akin to the OpenGL vs DirectX war. Microsoft will see this and freak, release a new "standard" and the sheeple will flock to their answer. - mrBitch, on 12/17/2008, -0/+1Damn, well let me know when you have put together an IPO, and I will put some money into that proposal.
- Vektuz, on 12/14/2008, -0/+1You are mistaken, it has worked out terribly for OpenGL. Granted, its a solid API, but design-by-comittee has slowed it down until its years behind. OpenGL3 was its deathknell
- MacHarborGuy, on 12/12/2008, -0/+1how could i NOT read the whole article. it could fit on a business card.
- 2Bnor2B, on 12/10/2008, -1/+2Yeah, maybe now Apple will be more aggressive at upgrading their video cards in their systems more frequently. Its hard for me as a gamer to understand how Apple's supported video cards always lag 1-2 years behind the industry standard
- mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -0/+1@Myztry RE: " Here we are with all these high-end systems spending a lot of time on the desktop, and often having up to a gig of non-paging memory sitting just the other side of the PCI-E bus. Must better suited for drive read-ahead than systems like USB based 'ready boost' "
That is a FANTASTIC idea! Do you mind if I patent it? =P - InorganicMatter, on 12/10/2008, -0/+1Very nice. I like this open standards idea a lot better than what everyone else has been doing. If we had kept going the way we were, developers would have been juggling CUDA, ATI Stream, PhysX, and probably an extended version from Microsoft. It's worked phenomenally for OpenGL and OpenAL, so I have high hopes for OpenCL.
- Myztry, on 12/11/2008, -0/+1I hereby assign all right to the idea to the Open Invention Network.
Yes, I do mind :) - MacParrot, on 12/10/2008, -1/+2@2B
Because Apple does not make a machine other than the Mac Pro that accepts different video cards, so ATI and NVidia don't make OS X drivers for their newer ones. You don't honestly believe that Microsoft writes the drivers for those cards for Windows do you? - InorganicMatter, on 12/10/2008, -1/+2Only if Microsoft chooses not to support it.
OpenCL, as well as OpenGL and OpenAL are all royalty-free-cross-platform standards. No one is charging you anything to implement it. As always, Apple is first to the scene supporting a new standard. BSD and Linux systems will follow shortly, and of course Microsoft will support it several years later, but only after their embraced and extended version is rejected by the industry. - mrBitch, on 12/17/2008, -0/+1@ jakem1 RE: " The point you're not getting is that it's not much of a standard if it's only in use on a couple of *nix based systems. It's also fairly pointless referring to "just those computers running Windows" when that means > 90% of the worlds computers.
Carry on in your childish little Mac fantasy. "
I have been coding and developing on PCs since the DOS days. I am new to this whole Mac thing ( bought a MacBook Pro just over a year ago ).
I was a gamer and an MS DOS and then MS Windows based developer through and through.
The only reason I originally bought a MacBook Pro was that OSX had "BootCamp" built in which allowed me to boot into a Windows partition for any Windows programs that were not available under OSX.
I thought that there were some essential Windows apps that I would not find any equivalents for in OSX.
And NOW after over a year of using OSX... I find that the only reason I have not yet deleted my Windows partition is that I still like to play a casual game of TF2 or ET every now and then.
What you don't seem to realise is what I also did not realise (until I used OSX). OSX is a far superior OS to Windows. I didn't know this until I actually started to use OSX for all of my day to day tasks.
RE: " Carry on in your childish little Mac fantasy. "
I think the guy living in the fantasy world is you. While I have used Windows for YEARS and have only just started using OSX... you have only used Windows.
It's perfectly Ok if all you want to do is play games. Windows is a great OS (at the moment) just to use to play games.
I trust that the fact that I can compare both OS after EXPERIENCE using both OS is a far better measure of which is superior than your sad little childish outbursts. - jakem1, on 12/10/2008, -2/+2@mrBitch: I understand the point you are making and I was using Apple as shorthand because they've been directly involved in developing the OpenCL spec. Furthermore, this thread is all about OS X vs. Windows 7 not about who developed the OpenCL spec.
Anyway, my remarks were directed at people like SawButter who was intimating that Apple are being innovative and Microsoft will just copy them (an argument I'm sure you are familiar with as you seem to rant on about it so much yourself).
Whether you like it or not, there are other companies who are working on GPGPU independently of Apple or the Khronos group and there is no envidence that anyone is copying anyone else. - ThirdPrize, on 12/10/2008, -3/+3It's only a standard if more than one person uses it.
- damndj, on 12/10/2008, -2/+2http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=opencl
- SawButter, on 12/10/2008, -2/+2You clearly get my point !
- Vektuz, on 12/10/2008, -2/+1Let's just hope it doesn't fall apart and get relegated to the CAD market, like OpenGL, due to design-by-comittee making it take 3 years to get any new feature added.
- DiggOrNotToDigg, on 12/10/2008, -4/+3Remember the hype about opengl 3.0 and what actually came out. Even though I use opengl all the time, its sad to see it falling so far behind DirectX. I have lost hope on Khronos group. Microsoft is making significant improvement in this field.
- jakem1, on 12/10/2008, -4/+3Sure, OpenCL is a standard but that's meaningless unless it's widely used. When DirectX 11 is released it's parallel processing will be standardised due to the fact that most industry players will support it and it will be in use on most computers.
What really counts is how well these new standards are incorporated into existing developer tools. If the next version of Objective-C uses OpenCL without any developer involvement then that's great, otherwise it will only be used by a very small number of developers.
Also, would you care to provide some proof that NVidia are now abandoning CUDA? Engadget is currently reporting that NVidia will provide support for CUDA, OpenCL and DirectX11 in the future.
http://www.engadget.com/2008/12/09/nvidia-dishes-a ... - sat0shi, on 12/10/2008, -2/+1Oh come on, was it really that bad?
- jakem1, on 12/10/2008, -6/+4Microsoft have been working on this type of parallel processing as part of DirectX 11 for a while now and NVidia released CUDA which does the same thing 6 months ago. Apple aren't the only ones working on this sort of thing and their version is no more official than anyone elses.
- deviikun, on 12/10/2008, -3/+1Unified architecture incoming!!
So what will this be used for other than simulations and shiny physics? - jakem1, on 12/10/2008, -4/+1@MrBitch: The point you're not getting is that it's not much of a standard if it's only in use on a couple of *nix based systems. It's also fairly pointless referring to "just those computers running Windows" when that means > 90% of the worlds computers.
Carry on in your childish little Mac fantasy. - ZippyV, on 12/10/2008, -6/+2A specification on paper is not a technology.
If you think Apple is the only one who is thinking about parallel computing than you are sadly mistaken. A lot of other companies like Intel, Sun Microsystems, IBM, NASA, Fujitsu and Microsoft are working together on creating a specification unlike Apple who wants to do it all by themselves.
http://openmp.org
Microsoft's C++ compiler already supports openmp 2.0. - MacHarborGuy, on 12/10/2008, -8/+3"described as the first open, royalty-free standard for cross-platform, parallel programming of modern processors"
Okay, we really need to stop throwing around the word "standard". A "standard" is something that has wide adoption. Industry standard for web browsers; standards for designing websites; HDTV resolution standards, etc. Look at Flash. I would consider that (at least before Silverlight came out) to be THE standard for graphical animation and interaction on the internet. Back when it was first released as FutureSplash, however, it was not a standard by any means. - SawButter, on 12/10/2008, -8/+3Good News for OS X SL users.
Bad News for Windows 7 future users. - mrBitch, on 12/10/2008, -9/+1It's funny that the "really big deal" about the Tesla Supercomputer is it's use of GPU cores for computational purposes :
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tesla_supercomputer_t ...
It's EVEN funnier that this is EXACTLY what is included in the next version of OSX (Snow Leopard) :
http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/21/opencl-spec-get ...
" The OpenCL standard itself, which allows for greater leveraging of GPUs and other hardware... "
And EVEN FUNNIER, is that once OpenCL is built into OSX, Apple can then advertise that it's Macs ARE supercomputers (again). - sat0shi, on 12/10/2008, -24/+2OpenCuntLick
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is