Tiny Corp Changes Course Yet Again With Plans To Offer AMD Radeon GPUs

[mdedetrich]

Saying "going to work with AMD", "not going to work with AMD", "going to work with AMD", ... many times isn't "being open". It's a shame that you're calling it "being open", as it misses the entire reason this person is untrustworthy.

And in this case thats AMD's fault, not Tiny Corp. They are hitting roadblocks which they literally cannot solve (or its very hard to do so) because its within closed source firmware and they realized this now.

Not everyone has fortune teller glasses that can predict the future.

Tinycorp appears to be a developer led company, not a marketing led company. So you get openness and honesty about the process they're going through. Which you call untrustworthy. Lol. Don't get me wrong I understand that lack of marketing does make them appear less trustworthy to normal folk who want an appliance to do a thing, but it has the opposite effect on tech nerds, and it's the nerds who have been paying attention.

Indeed, as a programmer this increases my confidence in them not the other way around. People that come up with these conclusions do so because of a lack of understanding/intellect.

[blackshard]

Indeed, as a programmer this increases my confidence in them not the other way around. People that come up with these conclusions do so because of a lack of understanding/intellect.

As a long time programmer, I perfectly understand the feeling of the guy running the company, but yet it runs a company that offers a product, and your product cannot change three times a week. As a possible customer, I feel confusion and unreadiness and will go away to seek stable alternatives.

[aviallon]

> requires 2x1500W (two 120V outlets)

I know that this is marketed to Smart People Who Should Know Better, but how long until someone buys one of these and plugs it into two outlets on the same 15A circuit?

Laughs in 240V being able to have the 3kW on a single outlet.

[Quackdoc]

As expected, the Ngreedia white knights are out in full force trashing AMD. Out of all places, its a shame such behavior.

This dude is trying to use the cards in a way that they weren't designed and tested for and is surprised and angry that his consumer cards aren't running his professional workload as well as he would like or that he isn't getting bespoke professional level support on consumer level equipment.
Almost like thats why professional products with better support exist, or heck, why AMD's entire semi-custom group exists.

I failed to see which Ngreedia gpus he is using, but if they are RTX, you can count on the lawyers sending some nice reminders of their eula.

AMD is the one that developed ROCm drivers for them. Perhaps they just shouldn't have since it's "not intended". If AMD never intended these devices to be used for ROCm, they never should have developed drivers for it.

Saying "going to work with AMD", "not going to work with AMD", "going to work with AMD", ... many times isn't "being open". It's a shame that you're calling it "being open", as it misses the entire reason this person is untrustworthy.

but they didn't just say that, they said what is more or less along the lines of "as it stands it's impossible to use AMD", "AMD might work with us to make these boxes possible", "AMD can't work with us to the extent that makes this possible so we won't be able to go with AMD unless we find something else", "We found something else that will make these boxes possible so we will go ahead with this, but don't expect it to 'just work'."

This isn't flip flopping, this is detailing the process...

That is not true. Many parts of the AMD GPU driver stack especially when it comes to compute are closed and even non-public.

What part of the rocm stack that they are working with is closed source outside of the firmware? Ill keep asking, but so far no one has been able to tell me

[qarium]

usually that would be called 7900XTX 48gb
not rebranded to something completely else
and mi series is something completely else and not comparable, meant for whole different workload and design.
anyhow you missed the point completely and stuck in the hyperbole. The point was that if you use the product according to the advertised specs, you must be special to say "it's not meant for that"

so you just don't like the name ? if amd rename the AMD PRO W7900 into 7900XTX 48gb then you love the product ???

you are crazy as shit.

[novideo]

It appears my info is outdated (it's been a long time since I've looked into it). I swear the last time I looked it up, ROCm on Linux required the proprietary user-space AMD driver.

I do wonder how much the open source ROCm stack actually does compared to the firmware though.

AMD's pre-ROCM OpenCL implementation and amdgpu-pro were proprietary, but afaik they're being deprecated if they haven't been already.

[novideo]

That is not true. Many parts of the AMD GPU driver stack especially when it comes to compute are closed and even non-public.

Example are the GIM drivers for recent MxGPU cards. Only public Linux driver is 1.05 for old FirePro cards.

If you ever saw a Google Stadia Workstation Development Node in action (Lenovo produced a few before Google pulled the plug), those were loaded front to back with proprietary and non-public driver code from AMD.

My understanding is that ROCm should eventually replace all this but AMD is not fully there yet. Probably every BC-250 user can testify how horrible the driver situation is.

And that is even before talking about further AMD semicustom stuff like the Android drivers for Xclipse (Exynos 2200 etc.).

Only for the more obscure hardware that you mentioned, usually because the vendor wants it, just like PlayStation's and Xbox's proprietary AMD GPU drivers. For a consumer using an AMD GPU on their Linux PC using Mesa and/or ROCm, everything is open besides the firmware.

[novideo]

Why can't AMD open up their firmware, and put all the proprietary features like DRM, HDMI 2.1, etc in an optional proprietary firmware blob/driver, like how Firefox makes DRM optional on Linux? And those that want DRM can just install the blob without making the firmware closed for everyone.

[varikonniemi]

so you just don't like the name ? if amd rename the AMD PRO W7900 into 7900XTX 48gb then you love the product ???

you are crazy as shit.

and after that when people are not as easily fooled, they would reduced the price premium to what normally 24gb extra vram could sanely cost.

[Forge]

At home I run AMD, because I like Linux and want GPUs as open as possible. At work we run Nvidia products, because they are in weight classes that AMD hasn't yet begun to explore. Show me an AMD product that can approach this: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-ce...per-superchip/

I hate it. My personal life has been so much better since I got Nvidia out of my Linux machines, but they are the only game in town at the highest end.