SYCL is a terrible option. The performance of any application on SYCL is currently quite poor. Why drop ROCm (used on the world's largest supercomputer?) for an even more unproven product that AMD has no control over the roadmap?
> Banding together with Intel to support SYCL would in my opinion
Except that Intel has more control over SYCL and has repeatedly hurt AMD products with anticompetitive behavior in the past. Why would AMD permit their software to be controlled be a competitor?
AMD is executing with ROCm NOW, with multiple Top500 supercomputer wins and deployment in major cloud vendors with MI300X. Yes, the software needs to improve, but the practice of throwing out software to start over is not a good strategy.
AMD has far more momentum in the data center than INTC at present.
> Banding together with Intel to support SYCL would in my opinion
Except that Intel has more control over SYCL and has repeatedly hurt AMD products with anticompetitive behavior in the past. Why would AMD permit their software to be controlled be a competitor?
AMD is executing with ROCm NOW, with multiple Top500 supercomputer wins and deployment in major cloud vendors with MI300X. Yes, the software needs to improve, but the practice of throwing out software to start over is not a good strategy.
AMD has far more momentum in the data center than INTC at present.