<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: GP-GPUs: OpenCL Is Ready For The Heavy Lifting</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/</link>
	<description>Open Source, Open Standards</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Oct 2013 13:48:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: cgorac</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/#comment-7975</link>
		<dc:creator>cgorac</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/#comment-7975</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;There is a small typo in the article, in explaining the role of the Khronos Group: \&quot;In addition to OpenCL, they also maintain the OpenCL graphics standard\&quot; - the latter should be \&quot;OpenGL\&quot;.  And exactly their current record in governing the OpenGL standard is not particularly convincing, so I don\&#039;t expect them to be much more successful with OpenCL.  Besides, anyone that actually tried to use OpenCL to target multiple platform (I did) could confess that all of its promise is just a myth at the moment - you just have to code for each platform specifics if you want to take the most of the performance out of it.  OpenCL also, out of all these WG members, doesn\&#039;t have much support: NVIDIA is simply pushing CUDA as vastly more mature platform, ATI/AMD is actually looking still unconvinced that there is market for GPGPU work, then there exist large number of additional competing low- (like Microsoft DirectCompute, etc.) or high-level solutions (stuff like upcoming Intel Ct, etc.); so Apple seems like the only true supporter of OpenCL, but their market is very small.  Thus, I don\&#039;t think OpenCL perspective is bright at all.
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is a small typo in the article, in explaining the role of the Khronos Group: \&#8221;In addition to OpenCL, they also maintain the OpenCL graphics standard\&#8221; &#8211; the latter should be \&#8221;OpenGL\&#8221;.  And exactly their current record in governing the OpenGL standard is not particularly convincing, so I don\&#8217;t expect them to be much more successful with OpenCL.  Besides, anyone that actually tried to use OpenCL to target multiple platform (I did) could confess that all of its promise is just a myth at the moment &#8211; you just have to code for each platform specifics if you want to take the most of the performance out of it.  OpenCL also, out of all these WG members, doesn\&#8217;t have much support: NVIDIA is simply pushing CUDA as vastly more mature platform, ATI/AMD is actually looking still unconvinced that there is market for GPGPU work, then there exist large number of additional competing low- (like Microsoft DirectCompute, etc.) or high-level solutions (stuff like upcoming Intel Ct, etc.); so Apple seems like the only true supporter of OpenCL, but their market is very small.  Thus, I don\&#8217;t think OpenCL perspective is bright at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: matador</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/#comment-7976</link>
		<dc:creator>matador</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/#comment-7976</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I would like to add 4 points:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;1- A simple tool for porting CUDA to OpenCL:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Swan is a small tool that aids the reversible conversion of existing CUDA codebases to OpenCL. Its main features are the translation of CUDA kernel source-code to OpenCL, and a common API that abstracts both CUDA and OpenCL runtimes. Swan preserves the convenience of the CUDA &lt;&lt;&lt; grid, block &gt;&gt;&gt; kernel launch syntax by generating C source-code for kernel entry-point functions. Possible uses include:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;    * Evaluating OpenCL performance of an existing CUDA code&lt;br /&gt;
    * Maintaining a dual-target OpenCL and CUDA code&lt;br /&gt;
    * Reducing dependence on NVCC when compiling host code&lt;br /&gt;
    * Support multiple CUDA compute capabilities in a single binary&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Swan is developed by the MultiscaleLab, Barcelona, and is available under the GPL2 license.&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.multiscalelab.org/swan&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;2- CLyther = Python + OpenCL:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CLyther is an under-development python tool for OpenCL similar to Cython for C. CLyther is a python language extension intended to make writing OpenCL code as easy as Python itself. CLyther currently only supports a subset of the Python language definition but adds many new features for OpenCL.&lt;br /&gt;
CLyther exposes both the OpenCL C library and language to python. It’s features include:&lt;br /&gt;
•	Fast prototyping of OpenCL code.&lt;br /&gt;
•	OpenCL kernel function creation using the Python language definition.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Strong OOP programming in OpenCL code.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Passing functions as arguments to kernel functions.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Python emulation mode for OpenCL code.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Fancy indexing of arrays.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Dynamic compilation at runtime.&lt;br /&gt;
http://clyther.sourceforge.net/&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3- PyOpenCL:&lt;br /&gt;
PyOpenCL lets you access the OpenCL parallel computation API from Python. Here\&#039;s what sets PyOpenCL apart:&lt;br /&gt;
•	Object cleanup tied to lifetime of objects. This idiom, often called RAII in C++, makes it much easier to write correct, leak- and crash-free code.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Completeness. PyOpenCL puts the full power of OpenCL’s API at your disposal, if you wish.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Convenience. While PyOpenCL\&#039;s primary focus is to make all of OpenCL accessible, it tries hard to make your life less complicated as it does so--without taking any shortcuts.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Automatic Error Checking. All OpenCL errors are automatically translated into Python exceptions.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Speed. PyOpenCL’s base layer is written in C++, so all the niceties above are virtually free.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Helpful, complete documentation and a wiki.&lt;br /&gt;
•	Liberal licensing (MIT).&lt;br /&gt;
http://mathema.tician.de/software/pyopencl&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4- LuxRender:&lt;br /&gt;
 LuxRender is a physically based and unbiased rendering engine. Based on state of the art algorithms, LuxRender simulates the flow of light according to physical equations, thus producing realistic images of photographic quality. LuxRender is free software - both for personal and commercial use - and is licensed under the GPL.&lt;br /&gt;
You will find amazing steps and results done to introduce OpenCL support in Luxrender:&lt;br /&gt;
http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index.php?title=Luxrender_and_OpenCL&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;thanks&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I would like to add 4 points:</p>
<p>1- A simple tool for porting CUDA to OpenCL:</p>
<p>Swan is a small tool that aids the reversible conversion of existing CUDA codebases to OpenCL. Its main features are the translation of CUDA kernel source-code to OpenCL, and a common API that abstracts both CUDA and OpenCL runtimes. Swan preserves the convenience of the CUDA &lt;&lt;&lt; grid, block &gt;&gt;&gt; kernel launch syntax by generating C source-code for kernel entry-point functions. Possible uses include:</p>
<p>    * Evaluating OpenCL performance of an existing CUDA code<br />
    * Maintaining a dual-target OpenCL and CUDA code<br />
    * Reducing dependence on NVCC when compiling host code<br />
    * Support multiple CUDA compute capabilities in a single binary</p>
<p>Swan is developed by the MultiscaleLab, Barcelona, and is available under the GPL2 license.<br />
<a href="http://www.multiscalelab.org/swan" rel="nofollow">http://www.multiscalelab.org/swan</a></p>
<p>2- CLyther = Python + OpenCL:</p>
<p>CLyther is an under-development python tool for OpenCL similar to Cython for C. CLyther is a python language extension intended to make writing OpenCL code as easy as Python itself. CLyther currently only supports a subset of the Python language definition but adds many new features for OpenCL.<br />
CLyther exposes both the OpenCL C library and language to python. It’s features include:<br />
•	Fast prototyping of OpenCL code.<br />
•	OpenCL kernel function creation using the Python language definition.<br />
•	Strong OOP programming in OpenCL code.<br />
•	Passing functions as arguments to kernel functions.<br />
•	Python emulation mode for OpenCL code.<br />
•	Fancy indexing of arrays.<br />
•	Dynamic compilation at runtime.<br />
<a href="http://clyther.sourceforge.net/" rel="nofollow">http://clyther.sourceforge.net/</a></p>
<p>3- PyOpenCL:<br />
PyOpenCL lets you access the OpenCL parallel computation API from Python. Here\&#8217;s what sets PyOpenCL apart:<br />
•	Object cleanup tied to lifetime of objects. This idiom, often called RAII in C++, makes it much easier to write correct, leak- and crash-free code.<br />
•	Completeness. PyOpenCL puts the full power of OpenCL’s API at your disposal, if you wish.<br />
•	Convenience. While PyOpenCL\&#8217;s primary focus is to make all of OpenCL accessible, it tries hard to make your life less complicated as it does so&#8211;without taking any shortcuts.<br />
•	Automatic Error Checking. All OpenCL errors are automatically translated into Python exceptions.<br />
•	Speed. PyOpenCL’s base layer is written in C++, so all the niceties above are virtually free.<br />
•	Helpful, complete documentation and a wiki.<br />
•	Liberal licensing (MIT).<br />
<a href="http://mathema.tician.de/software/pyopencl" rel="nofollow">http://mathema.tician.de/software/pyopencl</a></p>
<p>4- LuxRender:<br />
 LuxRender is a physically based and unbiased rendering engine. Based on state of the art algorithms, LuxRender simulates the flow of light according to physical equations, thus producing realistic images of photographic quality. LuxRender is free software &#8211; both for personal and commercial use &#8211; and is licensed under the GPL.<br />
You will find amazing steps and results done to introduce OpenCL support in Luxrender:<br />
<a href="http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index.php?title=Luxrender_and_OpenCL" rel="nofollow">http://www.luxrender.net/wiki/index.php?title=Luxrender_and_OpenCL</a></p>
<p>thanks&gt;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: znmeb</title>
		<link>http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/#comment-7977</link>
		<dc:creator>znmeb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linux-mag.com/id/7725/#comment-7977</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;I have a workstation with an NVidia GeForce 6150SE nForce 430 and a laptop with an ATI Radeon Mobility 3200. Unfortunately, the OpenCL SDK doesn\&#039;t appear to support the 3200! That\&#039;s a *huge* fail for AMD/ATI as far as I\&#039;m concerned. The laptop runs openSUSE 11.2 just fine with the ATI drivers - why can\&#039;t it run the OpenCL SDK too?
&lt;/p&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a workstation with an NVidia GeForce 6150SE nForce 430 and a laptop with an ATI Radeon Mobility 3200. Unfortunately, the OpenCL SDK doesn\&#8217;t appear to support the 3200! That\&#8217;s a *huge* fail for AMD/ATI as far as I\&#8217;m concerned. The laptop runs openSUSE 11.2 just fine with the ATI drivers &#8211; why can\&#8217;t it run the OpenCL SDK too?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>