Doesn't this mean application developers will have to explicitly sync the graphical state? If that's the case, then devs will have to write custom code for it to work on NVIDIA, correct? If so, I doubt this will "finally solve" any issues, only finally provide the ability to solve them... explicitly and with a lot of dev work + required awareness.
Nah, explicit sync is the objectively better model if you want high performance. Android went for explicit sync right from the start and from what I gather also Intel and AMD prefer it. The problem is, that the graphics stacks on Linux have been using implicit sync for ages and so far no one dared to change the status quo. Nvidia was "simply" rejecting implementing an inferior mechanism in their driver. While somewhat understandable, it was still a decision on the back of their users.
well i dearly miss CUDA as i don't get ZLUDA to work properly with Stable Diffusion and FSR is sill leagues behind DLSS... but yeah overall i am very happy
If you're someone who reallse uses CUDA and all their stuff and don't care about Wayland. NVidia is the choice you have to make. Simple as that.
If you don't care about those things or are willing to sacrifice time and tinker around with AMDs subpar alternatives, AMD is the way to go.
Because let's face it. AMD didn't care about machine learning stuff and they only now begin to dabble in it. They lost a huge amount of people who work with those things as their day job. They can't tell their bosses and/or clients that they can't work for a week or two until they figured out how to get this alternative running that is just starting to care about that field of work.
I had to update my laptop about two years ago and decided to go full AMD and it's been awesome. I've been running Wayland as a daily driver the whole time and and I don't even really notice it anymore.
It will not though. Explicit sync is not a magic solution, it's just another way of syncing GPU work. Unlike implicit sync it needs to be implemented by every part of the graphical stack. Just because Nvidia is implementing it will not solve issues with compositors not having it, and graphical libraries not having it, and apps not supporting it, and so on and so forth. It's a step in the right direction but it won't fix everything overnight like some people think.
Also it's silly that this piece mentions Wayland and Nvidia because (1) Wayland doesn't implement sync of any kind, they probably meant to say "the Wayland stack" and (2) Nvidia is not the only driver that needs to implement explicit sync.
I'd still like my Nvidia card to work so I'm happy about this, and when AMD on Linux eventually starts swapping over to explicit sync, I'll be happy for those users then too.
Cool. It should still use it though. If for nothing else than the parallelization improvements it allows.
If we stuck with the "it works fine so I'm not moving away from it" approach then we'd all still be on x11. Nvidia sucks and they should be more of a team player, but I think they were right to push for explicit sync over implicit. We should've been doing this from the beginning on wayland.
and they've been eating their lunch so long at this point I've given up on that changing.
The new world stands in cuda and that's just the way it is. I don't really want an nVidia, radeon seems far better for price to performance . Except I can justify an nVidia for work.
The amount of times I said that only to be quickly proven wrong by the fundamental forces of existence is the reason that's going to be written on my tombstone.
I think. it's just path stickiness at this point. CUDA works and then you can ignore it's existence and do the thing you actually care about. ML in the pre CUDA days was painful. CUDA makes it not painful. Asking people to return to painfully..
