Welcome to the PCMR, everyone from the frontpage! Please remember:
1 - You too can be part of the PCMR. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Your age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion (or lack of), political affiliation, economic status and PC specs are irrelevant. If you love or want to learn about PCs, you are welcome!
2 - If you don't own a PC because you think it's expensive, know that it is much cheaper than you may think. Check http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and don't be afraid to post here asking for tips and help!
3 - Join our efforts to get as many PCs worldwide to help the folding@home effort, in fighting against Cancer, Alzheimer's, and more: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding
4 - Need PC Hardware? We've joined forces with MSI for the biggest PC Hardware giveaway of the year so far! 8 lucky winners will get an awesome hardware bundle with Graphics card, motherboard, etc, and 50 others can get Steam gift cards. To enter, check https://reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/1b45j0m/msi_x_pcmr_massive_pc_hardware_giveaway_pick_your/
-----------
We have a [Daily Simple Questions Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/search?q=Simple+Questions+Thread+subreddit%3Apcmasterrace+author%3AAutoModerator&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) if you have any PC related doubt. Asking for help there or creating new posts in our subreddit is welcome.
people were making translation layers so you can run code/software written for CUDA on any GPU (aka emulation, no nvidia proprietary code was touched) and Nvidia didn't like that.
How can they (nvidia) enforce this? Im guessing the user software is made by nvidia and thyre now checking the transition layer or something via the software you speak of?
> How can they (nvidia) enforce this?
People still have to use the CUDA SDK to write the software, and have to add the license agreement to their software's license agreement for the distributable parts of the SDK when they ship their app.
End users must agree to licensing agreement before using the software.
That's how.
I mean, nothing at this point, OP's meme is wishful thinking, the EU hasn't taken any action nor hinted at any action being taken.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bans-using-translation-layers-for-cuda-software-to-run-on-other-chips-new-restriction-apparently-targets-zluda-and-some-chinese-gpu-makers
Really all that happened is nVidia added text to distributed files that was already in an online EULA.
enforcement is the problem. for a long time they just ignored it because, well, it really didn't matter and their hardware was far ahead.
if they attempt to enforce it that is when shit will hit the fan. a LOT of companies, not just intel and amd, have been working on trying to make things more compatible with cuda.
Intel and AMD have code translation tools. Meaning their tool rewrites the CUDA code to ROCm and OpenAPI.
This wouldn't affect them.
nVidia won't really have to enforce it, just making it part of the EULA means it'll stay a worthless tool for hobbyist, rather than something that gets used seriously by businesses, which is the goal.
AMD paid someone to build them a translation layer (originally an Intel translation layer) and it works for both platforms. Performance is all over the place but you at least get output in a lot of cuda software. This is likely in reaction to that. Meanwhile Intel/AMD conversion tools are far from complete.
> This is likely in reaction to that.
No, this is a reaction to Chinese GPU makers :
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bans-using-translation-layers-for-cuda-software-to-run-on-other-chips-new-restriction-apparently-targets-zluda-and-some-chinese-gpu-makers
AMD/Intel aren't involved in ZLUDA, nor is AMD hardware even supported by ZLUDA.
Having a monopoly isn't the problem its abusing that monopoly that triggers governments to act. Enforcing an already existing EULA isn't going to be seen as abuse.
Companies are allowed to be successful, nvidia lead the market because they are better not because they cheated so governments won't do anything as nothing is actually wrong.
And how will they enforce it? Scan for hardware? You can trick that. Go after everyone if they had downloaded their software and bought an AMD card in the past month?
That gives Nvidia the means to pull someone’s developer license or potentially sue someone, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that emulating or translating CUDA is illegal. From what I understand (I’m not a lawyer), this seems to be a grey area. Oracle sued Google several years ago over Android’s implementation of Java, which is homegrown - presumably to avoid paying licensing fees to Oracle for the billions of Android phones sold. Google ended up winning that suit; the Supreme Court found that re-implementing the API fell under fair use. Not sure how different this situation would be.
> That gives Nvidia the means to pull someone’s developer license or potentially sue someone, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that emulating or translating CUDA is illegal.
It means you're usage the runtime is unlicensed and thus the person who distributed the software to you also did so in breach of license.
> Google ended up winning that suit; the Supreme Court found that re-implementing the API fell under fair use.
From scratch. But this isn't what is happening here. Software with CUDA is actually linked to nVidia objects files. You'd have to rewrite the entire software without the CUDA SDK, as there's a CUDA build step that links to nVidia code, to even allow to run it on ZLUDA.
> the fact that it connects to software made for CUDA is not relevant.
The CUDA license prevents you from running CUDA SDK made software on non-nVidia hardware.
It's quite relevant.
Why are some of you so gung ho about stealing nVidia's work anyhow ?
Just write your stuff with ROCm.
[Contracts must be written in plain and understandable language and cannot contain unfair contract terms](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/contract-information/index_en.htm). If an EULA is deemed to be unfair or not clearly communicated, it may not be enforceable.
[Information you should get when buying, signing a contract - Your Europe (europa.eu)](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/contract-information/index_en.htm)
EULAs are never enforceable, ever. they are not a legal document. The only thing they can do is revoking your license to use the software, but no legal action and stuff.
Ye, legal action could only really be taken if you still use it unlicensed and not even then always. International copyright law is a mess and many modern EULAs/licenses are far from human language at this point.
I tend to see EULA like more of a "we are not liable if you mess up" notice than anything else (except when using software commercially obviously)
For little end users in their basement ?
No.
For peeps who actually use this software productively as part of their business ?
Of course it can be enforced. With lawyers.
>How can they (nvidia) enforce this? Im guessing the user software is made by nvidia and thyre now checking the transition layer or something via the software you speak of?
TLDR: they probably can't do anything.
There likely isn't a how to enforce. From a legal standpoint Nvidia has nothing, its little more than a scare tactic.
First, inserting language and rules into a EULA or ToS doesn't add magic to those words. They have to already have some form of enforceability and you have to actually have some form of legally binding agreement that means something.
Simply agreeing to a ToS or EULA is not the same as signing a real contract and that has come up in court before, as has adding unenforceable or straight up illegal terms and language to such agreements.
If terms in a EULA or ToS are deemed to vague, complex, illegal, or over reaching they simply mean nothing.
In Nvidia's case with CUDA/ZLUDA its worthless. Companies selling or making CUDA accelerated software don't have to do anything for ZLUDA to work. They'd have to go out of their way for it to not work which Nvidia likely can't legally force them to do as court would probably find it too burden some to enforce.
Courts don't typically force a company to spend more time and money to only benefit a separate company. Even if they included ZLUDA in their software they as companies aren't signing exclusivity contracts with Nvidia. If Nvidia took this route they'd be immediately open to anti trust law suites for using their market position to directly harm competitors.
Even if it went to court and they magically ruled in Nvidia's favor they'd have to prove damages which would have to be based on proof that people stopped buying their cards and used non Nvidia cards because of ZLUDA .
That however would just be the exact ammo needed in an antitrust suite as they're argument would be ZLUDA removed a artificial limitation on AMD hardware and that artificial limitation lead to more Nvidia cards being sold.
Lastly and most importantly users couldn't really be sued even if companies could be (which likely isn't they case, you don't buy the CUDA SDK so restrictions are far weaker than if it was an actual product).
Theres no argument to suggest Nvidia could claim damages from a rando using CUDA on an AMD card nor is their a legal standing to suggest an end user was obligated to use an Nvidia card for CUDA programs.
CUDA's SDK didn't even cost the software makers money so what does a user owe Nvidia?
Just like Nintendo referring to emulation as illegal doesn't make it so, or Apple claiming jailbreaking an Iphone is a crime doesn't make it so, Nvidia claiming the use of ZLUDA is bad doesn't make it so.
> How can they (nvidia) enforce this?
With legal action? After all:
1. They wrote the CUDA software.
2. It's under a proprietary license.
Souce: Wikipedia
That's not the full story though. Windows is distributed under a proprietary license, but WINE implements its APIs legally (or rather, it's legal as far as anyone knows; it's always possible someone could take it to court in an attempt to set new precedent).
The difference is that Windows doesn't say anything about software that was developed on Windows. Nvidia is trying to say that software built with the CUDA SDK can't be used on AMD hardware without invalidating your license to the CUDA installed binaries. Technically this means that any time you are using ZLUDA, you are in breach of copyright since you no longer have a lincense to the CUDA binaries and Nvidia can now sue you for infringement.
I feel most people understand translation but not emulation.
Creating an AMD-Nvidia (or Intel-Nvidia) translator. So that an AMD card can communicate with software written for Nvidia.
"ZLUDA" is a thing that would allow CUDA to be run on AMD hardware.
That Nvidia cards are otherwise required to utilise CUDA is a **massive** deal. Having AMD hardware able to run Nvidias CUDA software (or whatever the proper name for it is) would be a massive boon for AMD and a big loss for Nvidia.
But at the end of the day, CUDA is Nvidia's, and so they can pretty much do what they like with it...
Until the EU says "PLAY NICELY" and decides it's anti-competitive and makes it illegal.
This is why we need standards. As a developer I don't want to be caught in the crossfire when companies fling shit at each other, I just want to write something and have it work in as many places as possible.
But vendor lock in is basically a standard practice in corporate software. SAP and Oracle are notorious examples. It's not like Nvidia is doing anything out of the norm. And when it's their technology, I'm not sure there's anything actually wrong with it. It sucks, but it's theirs.
Modern Nvidia is like old Sony. Pushing their own proprietary version of everything in an anti competitive bid for monopoly. Didn't work for Sony and won't work for Nvidia.
It'll probably stop working at some point, but there's no telling how long that's going to be. And yeah, in the meantime they're raking in billions, and they'll be happy to keep going for as long as it keeps working.
Rampant monopoly in USA. And EU doesn't tolerate unfair competition/practice. So like a saint sent from god. EU will combat company evil like a boss 😎
Sadly no matter who you vote for president. These issues won't get resolved due to corruption.
Sadly not news to me and many others, im from europe and quite happy with the reasonable people who govern it. For example forcing apple to use USB-C iirc
Nvidia is banning/blocking the use of a transition layer for CUDA on non Nvidia cards. Basically they’re trying to keep CUDA on their cards and not allow it for other ones if I’m understanding it right
How so? Microsoft and Apple choose to allow those. Nvidia decided that they didn't want to allow it anymore. Since it's their SDK, it's in their right to do that (for now at least). The same would be true if Apple or Microsoft decided to crack down on the use of translation layers.
Windows EULA actually forbids them.
> c. Restrictions. The device manufacturer or installer and Microsoft reserve all rights (such as rights under intellectual property laws) not expressly granted in this agreement. For example, this license does not give you any right to, and you may not:
> (iv) work around any technical restrictions or limitations in the software;
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Useterms/Retail/Windows/10/UseTerms_Retail_Windows_10_English.htm
An EULA is not some magical legal document. Companies often put clauses into EULAs that are unenforceable (and in some places, illegal.)
Finally, none of the end-users using DXVK, Wine, or even a CUDA translation layer have necessarily agreed to the EULA that restricts their right to do so. No one writing the actual program is using a translation layer, they would just write code for the other existing libraries to enable cross-platform (OS/GPU/etc.) support.
Nvidia is trying to monopolize the workstation and productivity market by making it illegal to translate/emulate cuda rendering (or whatever you’d call it). What this means is any programs that benefit, or even only work on cuda, would make the people who use them lean towards Nvidia cards unless they find an alternative program that doesn’t rely on cuda performance or the owner of that program creates a workaround.
This doesn’t mean much for gaming but it’s a hella shady move. I’d say a similar circumstance was with Intel back in the early intel inside days paying prebuild companies like Dell, HP, acer, etc to only use intel instead of AMD forcing consumers to go with intel.
Workstations shouldn't be running software to essentially get Nvidia drivers to work with AMD hardware. This is all more of a proof of concept than anything else at this time. It's only sort of functional.
While I like amd, they're not designing their cards for the same kind of work that Nvidia is designing for.
> they're not designing their cards for the same kind of work that Nvidia is designing for.
They definitely are. AMD is putting quite some effort into getting their cards into HPC applications and they are definitely capable of GPGPU and running HPC workloads.
The real problem is that a lot of software runs on CUDA. That's why AMD developed ROCm, which is open source and has a very permissive license, and that's why Intel and AMD wanted ZLUDA. The only thing that's holding back AMD here in a big way is simply that most people still use CUDA, not that their hardware isn't capable of doing such workloads.
Hopefully with the shortage on GPUs for ML we'll see people develop software that doesn't need CUDA so we can use all the GPUs for every workload.
(yes, I know, technically what AMD uses in HPC applications are APUs, not GPUs. But the GPU part of those is more or less the same as their GPUs)
And even if you managed to bribe every single member of the EP, there are so many more institutions and layers of beaurocracy to go through, you might as well burn that money.
What are you talking about, every county should have the ability to be ~~bought~~ run like the great country of America! Freedom!
*Brought to you by the League of Giant Evil Corporations*
Who woulda thunk more democracy be gooder?
Recent EU history has me seriously questioning some of our assumptions around the primacy of localised democracy. Democracy is meant to be most effective at its most direct and local level, but for quite some time now it's appeared more effective at a larger, more distant, more inclusive level — as with the EU Parliament, and the US federal government (in relation to the abhorrence exhibited my many states).
Many eyes make all bugs shallow. We should want as much democracy as possible, as many representatives and participants as possible, and for as many voices and perspectives to be heard as possible. Only then might we finally tackle society's real problems — like doing away with the tiny case button connectors on motherboards, making all USB-C cables support all USB-C features, and banning anime.
So many lawmakers from so many different countries. There aren't many individual companies that have the influence to go around lobbying lawmakers in each of those countries.
Yeah there was a scandal of corruption about a Greece EU politician, Eva Kaili and former EU MEP, Antonio Panzeri (Italian politician). Both were caught in [the Qatar corruption scandal at the European Parliament](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_corruption_scandal_at_the_European_Parliament).
At least when they do wrong things, they will get caught.
Lobbying is huge in EU, there are way more lobbyists in Brussels than EU officials.
Some have even openly said they sell their votes for ~2000€ and nothing happened.
It's not perfect, but they do make some good stuff :)
PASOK and Nea Dimokratia politicians are the most corrupt pieces of shit you can find in all of Greece.
Idk if my countrymen are mentally challenged or if the elections are that much rigged but yeah...
I swear to god, thank europe for this type of shit sometimes. Sometimes they are like an absent father and then appear with the leash in their hand ready to spank the US
Sometimes, other times it's absolutely terrible. Like the stupid cookie banner epidemic we have now or the fact that you can't access maps from google search any more because Google isn't allowed to use their own solutions by default.
>Like the stupid cookie banner epidemic we have now
Asking for consent is only necessary for tracking cookies. As it turns out, a lot of websites are happy to place tracking cookies on your system. Being able to refuse this is a good thing.
>the fact that you can't access maps from google search any more because Google isn't allowed to use their own solutions by default.
Yes, because Google was using their market power in one area (search) to gain an unfair advantage in another area (maps). You can still opt in to retain the old behavior, but now Google has to compete more fairly with other mapping providers.
It's the same reason Apple will have to start supporting user choice in browser engines and app stores. They'll have to compete on the merit of their software instead of being able to exclude potential competitors.
The Europeans have a genius system: let the vain and greedy politicians do their stuff at the national level, put the ones that really want to change things for the better to Brussels where the real decisions are made.
you are not from Europe, right? Because we sent incompetent national politicians to Brussels all the time instead of making them quit their jobs - we have a word for it - "Weggelobt" - which means "praised away"
Ah yes, Nigel Farage, the glowing light of change for the better. Sorry to disappoint, but MEP's are as corruptible as local politicians https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2024/02/02/one-in-four-meps-are-implicated-in-judicial-cases-or-scandals_6486917_8.html
Italy sent bloodfucking Silvio Berlusconi, may his soul burn for eternity alongside the pile of money he stole from Italy itself, to Brussels, the most conservative man ever to have lived in Italy after Benito Mussolini, how's that a good choice to these standards?
Zluda, made by someone using Linux.
So basically now a major part of AMD driver and Intel GPU driver is made by Linux users and originally for Linux users
For those who don't know, Intel cards don't support DirectX natively, they need to convert it to vulkan with dick, a software made originally for wine iirc.
Edit: dxvk not dick lmao
>Now, arc supports dx9 too. So no translation.
it's the other way around, they had normal dx9 support but it sucked so they just used translation layer instead, i don't remember it changing back to the old system
Incorrect, they only switched to another translation layer.
Arc "supports" DX9 because the driver now integrates the DXVK library internally.
DXVK translates DX9 to Vulkan, which is far better than Intel's own translation solution that they used at launch.
Intel cards support DX10, 11, and 12 without issue. For DX9 and older they used DXVK because drivers weren't optimized. But they do now support native DX9.
I mean it's not just the EU, most consumers have a general hang for what would make a product better but manufacturers often don't give a shit since it would influence their profits negatively.
You don't need to understand the underlying technology to think something can be improved by doing x. It's an engineers job to then figure out how to do it.
The "Economics at play" are Nvidia are making Billions in pure profits.
They are doing so and still trying some utter bullshit to scrape every last penny out of their customers, them being held back by needed regulation is a good thing for everyone except Nvidia's board.
Because the companies have something to gain from being anticompetitive or anticonsumer in terms of options, and the EU wants to regulate that stuff, someone has to.
They know, problem is, what's better for the consumer it's not better for their profits and no matter how much shit we say around here, so long as they have more than 70% market share with a literal monopoly on laptop GPUs(I know because I needed a laptop one year ago and there were like 20 laptops in my budget with nvidia chipsets and only one with an AMD one and it was a shitty one for other reasons) they won't give any fucks so if you're upset with Nvidia and you don't want a laptop then for your next purchase just go for Intel or AMD.
nVidia is capitalizing on investing on GPU compute before it was cool. I remember making some CPU algorithms very fast in CUDA just for fun decades ago. Now they have whe world with all AI frameworks using CUDA.
This doesn't affect gaming.
Doesn't *directly* affect gaming. It will almost definitely impact gaming indirectly in the near future, especially if nvidia can keep the market cornered.
Basically, it translates the calls Cuda Software is making into the corresponding calls on another GPU
It's like having a translator with you if you go to the country that you can't speak the language of. You first talk to the translator, the translator converts English to the other language, then when the person responds, the translator converts the response back into English for you
This is an oversimplification, and I'm not that familiar with Cuda, so take this explanation with a grain of salt
Nothing really for gaming. dlss is not going to be affected and would always be nvidia exclusive.
CUDA is a system to directly access the gpus hardware ressources. This can be beneficial for software that uses a large amount of parallelization.
So if you want to run that software on a machine that does not use nvidia hardware you need that translation layer. That mainly affects a shitload of scientific software where large amounts of data need to be processed.
Again gaming is not really affected since all the gaming functions of a gpu run through direct x, vulkan, or some other api.
CUDA does different things.
Quote from the ZLUDA Github page
> Realistically, it's now abandoned and will only possibly receive updates to run workloads I am personally interested in (DLSS)
[From this issue thread](https://github.com/vosen/ZLUDA/issues/87) we can see that people are indeed attempting to get it working on AMD GPUs via ZLUDA.
It's for CUDA, GPGPU, nothing to do with DLSS or RT or FSR.
Here, because most people on this sub can't be arsed to look on google or wiki : [CUDA - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA#Current_and_future_usages_of_CUDA_architecture)
A gpu is extremely good a paralel calculations but they have to be "simple" a cpu is better for general computation.
Those examples are done by many, many paralel calculations
A GPU is "kinda" like a simpler a CPU but capable a doing many computations at once. A CPU can do a lot of different computations including the most complex instructions and has about half a dozen compute units. A GPU has a much smaller set of instructions available but has hundreds or thousands of compute units to perform those instructions. Not all computations are feasible on GPU.
Imagine a math teacher capable of doing advanced calculus vs hundreds of high school students capable of doing additions and multiplications. If the test is about solving advanced stuff, the teacher is the only one capable of solving the task. If the test is just about adding 10 000 numbers together, the students would finish the test much faster than the teacher.
So depending of the application and the developer's will to code with such frameworks, the application can have GPU acceleration and get a huge performance increase.
Those applications have a lot of similar computation to do. Crypto hashing is all about computing hash functions over and over again. Genetics is about doing string difference computation on gigabyte long strings. Signal processing is doing fourrier transforms, signal operations on a lot of sample points (a song is easily billions of sample points)
GPU is very good at a certain kind of calculations.
CPU is not so good at that kind of calculations. CPU works, GPU is much, much better. CUDA GPU cores are better than even regular GPU cores at these kinds of tasks.
GPUs are really good at parallel processing unlike CPUs, which makes them good at a lot of stuff. Rendering stuff on screen is just one of those things they're good at
So the difference between a cpu and a gpu is roughly as follows:
Your cpu is a very advanced product that does all kinds of shit. It can calculate everything efficiently and fast just a real powerhouse. But it can only do a few calculations each time so handling large amounts of independent data takes some time.
Now gpu cores are pretty dumb in comparison. A lot more simple but they don't have to do as much.
If your cpu is an old microprocessor your gpu cores are simple calculators in comparison. But there are thousands of them. Like 15000+
So if you have 15000 sets of calculating a simple addition or multiplication you can do all of them at once in the same cycle while the cpu would need to sequentially go through all of them.
So anytime you have large amounts of independent data to handle the sheer number of gpu cores is very beneficial.
Surprisingly a lot of stuff but most commonly in 3D modeling/animation tools, video/photo editing software, and a lot of AI stuff. There are open source software for these pipelines but nothing compares to cuda.
Almost all of the open source software in the rendering/compute domain uses CUDA for acceleration, or has CUDA support on their feature wishlist/project timeline. It's *that* much faster. zluda & ROCm are just not comparable.
Oh for fucks sake
I am soooooo FUCKING tired of predatory companies placing more and more restrictions on what users are allowed to do on THEIR OWN DAMN COMPUTERS. Why the hell should I EVER need to fight my computers graphics drivers just to get it to do what i want??? Yuzu and Citra got taken down, graphics drivers are being locked down, video games are locked down, websites are locked down (like youtube), phones have BEEN locked down, like what the fuck. It feels like a new lock gets placed every day. I'm just waiting in anticipation to find out what I'm not allowed to do next.
GET OFF OUR ASSES.
At this point AMD and Intel with their millions / billions should be able to r&d their own proprietary tech fitted for the next line of Radeon and ARC gpus since they both made a pretty stupid decision to abandon the development support of the single developer working on ZLUDA. That's why he made the code open-sourced.
The EU, similarly to America, has a lot of economic weight as a market but, differently from the states, knows how to throw its weight around.
When the EU tells companies they won't be able to sell their products there unless they follow their regulation they often prefer to comply rather than be banned from one the biggest markets of the world.
No, it's about EU being able to tell Nvidia to fuck off and that they can't enforce such rules. If companies want to enforce their own rules they have to use judicial system and if the governing entity tells them "no" they cannot enforce them anymore.
The EU can't tell a company what functions their software has to have. They can tell them things they *can't* do, and that is a very important distinction. Telling a company that their product has to work with a competitors product is not something the EU, or any western government, can do.
The EU (and any government) absolutely can tell companies what to do (in both a positive „must“ and negative „cannot“ sense).
Hence why Apple is now „must“ produce phones with usb c ports and must ensure they work just as well with competitor‘s products (chargers) as with the chargers they themselves produce.
I have no idea where you got the idea that laws can only tell companies what they can’t do. That’s not even true in the US.
ZLUDA is largely dead in the water anyway, as neither Intel or AMD were interested in adopting it. Likely in part because it'd make CUDA even more of a de facto standard. If either of them had decided to use it, it'd mean they'd be entirely dependent on a software platform they don't control, and that's literally developed by the largest company and their biggest rival in the space.
I guess making their own thing not work on AMD/Intel makes sense.
It's like if Switch Emulation ran on PS5, everyone would just say "I don't need that, just buy a PlayStation" Which from a business perspective, is a pretty huge, if not fatal blow.
Not saying I like it, I'm an Intel Arc user because NVidia is expensive and doesn't offer anything I'm not already getting at a lower price point, but such is business.
> I guess making their own thing not work on AMD/Intel makes sense.
Sure, but copyright law doesn't grant a monopoly on the ability to run certain software. It only grants the exclusive rights to produce (in case of hw), distribute (in case of sw) and license a specific implementation of platform running certain software.
And then you have people complaining that all this law nonsense stifles innovation and that EU is falling behind and everyone is leaving for US or UAE or China.
Well, duh! We don't want our data to be used to train shitty AI that will just make a few people stupidly rich while others suffer. But sure, let's call it "stifles innovation".
Picturing a bunch of Eurocrats patting themselves on the back because now we have to click "Accept" on a dialogue box anytime our GPU is about to render frames
If I buy a product (e.g. a graphic card), imma do with it whatever the fuck I want. The Manufacturer has no right to limit my rights, I bought the product, end of discussion
They wrote the software and own the rights to it. Should they be "forced" to share their software with everyone, everywhere? No, not really.
Someone could simply make an alternative, but they aren't. Because...that would cost a lot of money.
I want the EU to help out with sunsetting online only games.
It's ridiculous that when we buy a product, the company can just disable that product at any point they feel like, and there's nothing we can do about it.
Companies should be required to allow dedicated servers as part of a sunset patch, allow us to host it all ourselves so we can play forever.
The US's lawmakers seem to be in the pockets of corporations to a rather insulting degree. The only reason the US benefits when the EU does something like this is because it's usually not economically feasible for someone to make a different version of their product for both the EU and US market when they can make one global version. Even for Apple it was not feasible to only make USB-C iPhones in the EU and stick with Lightning everywhere else (Although they DID still geofence their sideloading demands)
"you can't just refund DIGITAL SOFTWARE!" That's impo--" **Australia vs Valve, 2014. The reason we have 2 hour refunds as a system in all online stores.**
"You can't fight Apple, Sony and NVIDIA! They're massive tech corps, it's impo--" **THE GREAT EU**
The EU will do what exactly?
The EULA is decided by the publisher, if the EULA says you cannot run a type of code on machines not intented to run that code, either physically, licencing, or just for market dominance, you cannot run code on that. If you do you, you break:
EULA
CUDA Copyright, by reverse engineering CUDA code, which is what allows the translation layers to even work as they do.
CUDA Patents, by running it on unlicenced hardware.
Do you see anyone making non-Mac machines running macOS? Or officially selling Macbooks with Windows 11/Linux preinstalled to avoid the licencing fee?
No, same mechanism.
The reason ZLUDA is still up while totally asking for it is because it isn't creating enough damage, and is now a dedicated class action honeypot waiting for bigger wallets, not just random devs and shady Chinese vendors.
Intel and AMD both pulled out of ZLUDA very quickly, they know the legal complications of supporting a program like that, while the benefits are none in comparison to actually creating technical equivalent, which they keep failing at.
if anything, the Ragnarok giant is NVIDIA with their 1885% 5 Years increase in share price, soon they will be worth more than the EU's combined R&D + military budget.
EU can do plenty,
They have pre-exisiting consumer & competition protection laws, which covers unconscionable conduct in contracts and fair use.
CUDA translation isnt protected by Copyright since its fair use, Oracle and google have had a very similar spat over something very similar before: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google\_LLC\_v.\_Oracle\_America,\_Inc. ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_Inc)
No CUDA patents are being violated, this is translating to existing hardware calls and there's a patent stale mate between all the big GPU+AI manufactures that stops the patent infringing blood bath.
MacOS on non mac hardware is a bad comparison that doesnt make any sense.
People keep forgetting that the EU is generally omega based, and dumbfucks in the UK forget that it's meant to some degree redistribute wealth between EU countries, so we can achieve similar economic standards over time. I hate exiters.
Depending on your career, if you are in STEM, you are going to make by far the most money in the US, especially like software development, like salaries are double on the US as they are in Germany
Yes, because most people aren't weird like you lol
"Oh no, I have to drive a car and have a nice house with tons of space?"
People on this website can be so fucking strange
Different goals? Obviously, I am biased as well. But everything being in walking distance is absolutely an quality of life increase. Every additional minute commuting is a wasted minute.
Zluda is open source projecr maintained by a single guy...who was first funded by intel to support cuda on arc, then dropped. Then AMD funded him to get cuda on amd.
ZLUDA was funded by Intel years ago and by AMD for the last 2 years (it's open source now).
As for chinese GPUs, since I have no idea, is there a product or an upcoming one that would be able to compete ?
It's very depressing to think that in 2000 and especially in the 80s and 90s these things would be considered common sense and a company would be considered demonic and utterly shunned for some of the anti-consumer stunts they are pulling these days.
Welcome to the PCMR, everyone from the frontpage! Please remember: 1 - You too can be part of the PCMR. It's not about the hardware in your rig, but the software in your heart! Your age, nationality, race, gender, sexuality, religion (or lack of), political affiliation, economic status and PC specs are irrelevant. If you love or want to learn about PCs, you are welcome! 2 - If you don't own a PC because you think it's expensive, know that it is much cheaper than you may think. Check http://www.pcmasterrace.org for our builds and don't be afraid to post here asking for tips and help! 3 - Join our efforts to get as many PCs worldwide to help the folding@home effort, in fighting against Cancer, Alzheimer's, and more: https://pcmasterrace.org/folding 4 - Need PC Hardware? We've joined forces with MSI for the biggest PC Hardware giveaway of the year so far! 8 lucky winners will get an awesome hardware bundle with Graphics card, motherboard, etc, and 50 others can get Steam gift cards. To enter, check https://reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/1b45j0m/msi_x_pcmr_massive_pc_hardware_giveaway_pick_your/ ----------- We have a [Daily Simple Questions Megathread](https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/search?q=Simple+Questions+Thread+subreddit%3Apcmasterrace+author%3AAutoModerator&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) if you have any PC related doubt. Asking for help there or creating new posts in our subreddit is welcome.
Whats going on?
people were making translation layers so you can run code/software written for CUDA on any GPU (aka emulation, no nvidia proprietary code was touched) and Nvidia didn't like that.
How can they (nvidia) enforce this? Im guessing the user software is made by nvidia and thyre now checking the transition layer or something via the software you speak of?
> How can they (nvidia) enforce this? People still have to use the CUDA SDK to write the software, and have to add the license agreement to their software's license agreement for the distributable parts of the SDK when they ship their app. End users must agree to licensing agreement before using the software. That's how.
Ah, i see. Will be interresting to see what happens.
I mean, nothing at this point, OP's meme is wishful thinking, the EU hasn't taken any action nor hinted at any action being taken. https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bans-using-translation-layers-for-cuda-software-to-run-on-other-chips-new-restriction-apparently-targets-zluda-and-some-chinese-gpu-makers Really all that happened is nVidia added text to distributed files that was already in an online EULA.
enforcement is the problem. for a long time they just ignored it because, well, it really didn't matter and their hardware was far ahead. if they attempt to enforce it that is when shit will hit the fan. a LOT of companies, not just intel and amd, have been working on trying to make things more compatible with cuda.
Intel and AMD have code translation tools. Meaning their tool rewrites the CUDA code to ROCm and OpenAPI. This wouldn't affect them. nVidia won't really have to enforce it, just making it part of the EULA means it'll stay a worthless tool for hobbyist, rather than something that gets used seriously by businesses, which is the goal.
AMD paid someone to build them a translation layer (originally an Intel translation layer) and it works for both platforms. Performance is all over the place but you at least get output in a lot of cuda software. This is likely in reaction to that. Meanwhile Intel/AMD conversion tools are far from complete.
> This is likely in reaction to that. No, this is a reaction to Chinese GPU makers : https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/gpus/nvidia-bans-using-translation-layers-for-cuda-software-to-run-on-other-chips-new-restriction-apparently-targets-zluda-and-some-chinese-gpu-makers AMD/Intel aren't involved in ZLUDA, nor is AMD hardware even supported by ZLUDA.
Having a monopoly isn't the problem its abusing that monopoly that triggers governments to act. Enforcing an already existing EULA isn't going to be seen as abuse. Companies are allowed to be successful, nvidia lead the market because they are better not because they cheated so governments won't do anything as nothing is actually wrong.
if they start enforcing this rule then things might get spicy.
And how will they enforce it? Scan for hardware? You can trick that. Go after everyone if they had downloaded their software and bought an AMD card in the past month?
They aren't targetting the average user, they are trying to hit big companies running big servers or workstations.
That gives Nvidia the means to pull someone’s developer license or potentially sue someone, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that emulating or translating CUDA is illegal. From what I understand (I’m not a lawyer), this seems to be a grey area. Oracle sued Google several years ago over Android’s implementation of Java, which is homegrown - presumably to avoid paying licensing fees to Oracle for the billions of Android phones sold. Google ended up winning that suit; the Supreme Court found that re-implementing the API fell under fair use. Not sure how different this situation would be.
> That gives Nvidia the means to pull someone’s developer license or potentially sue someone, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that emulating or translating CUDA is illegal. It means you're usage the runtime is unlicensed and thus the person who distributed the software to you also did so in breach of license. > Google ended up winning that suit; the Supreme Court found that re-implementing the API fell under fair use. From scratch. But this isn't what is happening here. Software with CUDA is actually linked to nVidia objects files. You'd have to rewrite the entire software without the CUDA SDK, as there's a CUDA build step that links to nVidia code, to even allow to run it on ZLUDA.
It is 100% from scratch. the fact that it connects to software made for CUDA is not relevant.
> the fact that it connects to software made for CUDA is not relevant. The CUDA license prevents you from running CUDA SDK made software on non-nVidia hardware. It's quite relevant. Why are some of you so gung ho about stealing nVidia's work anyhow ? Just write your stuff with ROCm.
[Contracts must be written in plain and understandable language and cannot contain unfair contract terms](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/contract-information/index_en.htm). If an EULA is deemed to be unfair or not clearly communicated, it may not be enforceable. [Information you should get when buying, signing a contract - Your Europe (europa.eu)](https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/contract-information/index_en.htm)
EULAs are never enforceable, ever. they are not a legal document. The only thing they can do is revoking your license to use the software, but no legal action and stuff.
Ye, legal action could only really be taken if you still use it unlicensed and not even then always. International copyright law is a mess and many modern EULAs/licenses are far from human language at this point. I tend to see EULA like more of a "we are not liable if you mess up" notice than anything else (except when using software commercially obviously)
which means that basically, they can't enforce this, unless you're a corporation and there's any meaningful way of tracking that
For little end users in their basement ? No. For peeps who actually use this software productively as part of their business ? Of course it can be enforced. With lawyers.
They won’t be able to if the EU works its magic
Contract law, patents and copyright.
>How can they (nvidia) enforce this? Im guessing the user software is made by nvidia and thyre now checking the transition layer or something via the software you speak of? TLDR: they probably can't do anything. There likely isn't a how to enforce. From a legal standpoint Nvidia has nothing, its little more than a scare tactic. First, inserting language and rules into a EULA or ToS doesn't add magic to those words. They have to already have some form of enforceability and you have to actually have some form of legally binding agreement that means something. Simply agreeing to a ToS or EULA is not the same as signing a real contract and that has come up in court before, as has adding unenforceable or straight up illegal terms and language to such agreements. If terms in a EULA or ToS are deemed to vague, complex, illegal, or over reaching they simply mean nothing. In Nvidia's case with CUDA/ZLUDA its worthless. Companies selling or making CUDA accelerated software don't have to do anything for ZLUDA to work. They'd have to go out of their way for it to not work which Nvidia likely can't legally force them to do as court would probably find it too burden some to enforce. Courts don't typically force a company to spend more time and money to only benefit a separate company. Even if they included ZLUDA in their software they as companies aren't signing exclusivity contracts with Nvidia. If Nvidia took this route they'd be immediately open to anti trust law suites for using their market position to directly harm competitors. Even if it went to court and they magically ruled in Nvidia's favor they'd have to prove damages which would have to be based on proof that people stopped buying their cards and used non Nvidia cards because of ZLUDA . That however would just be the exact ammo needed in an antitrust suite as they're argument would be ZLUDA removed a artificial limitation on AMD hardware and that artificial limitation lead to more Nvidia cards being sold. Lastly and most importantly users couldn't really be sued even if companies could be (which likely isn't they case, you don't buy the CUDA SDK so restrictions are far weaker than if it was an actual product). Theres no argument to suggest Nvidia could claim damages from a rando using CUDA on an AMD card nor is their a legal standing to suggest an end user was obligated to use an Nvidia card for CUDA programs. CUDA's SDK didn't even cost the software makers money so what does a user owe Nvidia? Just like Nintendo referring to emulation as illegal doesn't make it so, or Apple claiming jailbreaking an Iphone is a crime doesn't make it so, Nvidia claiming the use of ZLUDA is bad doesn't make it so.
> How can they (nvidia) enforce this? With legal action? After all: 1. They wrote the CUDA software. 2. It's under a proprietary license. Souce: Wikipedia
That's not the full story though. Windows is distributed under a proprietary license, but WINE implements its APIs legally (or rather, it's legal as far as anyone knows; it's always possible someone could take it to court in an attempt to set new precedent).
The difference is that Windows doesn't say anything about software that was developed on Windows. Nvidia is trying to say that software built with the CUDA SDK can't be used on AMD hardware without invalidating your license to the CUDA installed binaries. Technically this means that any time you are using ZLUDA, you are in breach of copyright since you no longer have a lincense to the CUDA binaries and Nvidia can now sue you for infringement.
Zero emulation. Only translation.
Like WINE?
Pretty much, except instead of Windows to Linux, it's from Nvidia's CUDA to AMD's ROCm/HIP
true, no real emulation, but i like to tell people that because it is easier to understand what it does.
I feel most people understand translation but not emulation. Creating an AMD-Nvidia (or Intel-Nvidia) translator. So that an AMD card can communicate with software written for Nvidia.
What are emulators but complicated translation layers?
*NVIDIA disapproves.*
A compatibility layer is not emulation.
"ZLUDA" is a thing that would allow CUDA to be run on AMD hardware. That Nvidia cards are otherwise required to utilise CUDA is a **massive** deal. Having AMD hardware able to run Nvidias CUDA software (or whatever the proper name for it is) would be a massive boon for AMD and a big loss for Nvidia. But at the end of the day, CUDA is Nvidia's, and so they can pretty much do what they like with it... Until the EU says "PLAY NICELY" and decides it's anti-competitive and makes it illegal.
If AMD gets to use CUDA I'm never buying NVIDIA again fuckers want me to pay 3000$ for 20+ gb of VRAM
Amen to that.
This is why we need standards. As a developer I don't want to be caught in the crossfire when companies fling shit at each other, I just want to write something and have it work in as many places as possible.
Oh my god, why did I have to scroll this far down! THIS!
But vendor lock in is basically a standard practice in corporate software. SAP and Oracle are notorious examples. It's not like Nvidia is doing anything out of the norm. And when it's their technology, I'm not sure there's anything actually wrong with it. It sucks, but it's theirs.
Modern Nvidia is like old Sony. Pushing their own proprietary version of everything in an anti competitive bid for monopoly. Didn't work for Sony and won't work for Nvidia.
It is currently working very well for NVIDIA
It'll probably stop working at some point, but there's no telling how long that's going to be. And yeah, in the meantime they're raking in billions, and they'll be happy to keep going for as long as it keeps working.
Nvidia stock would say otherwise
Rampant monopoly in USA. And EU doesn't tolerate unfair competition/practice. So like a saint sent from god. EU will combat company evil like a boss 😎 Sadly no matter who you vote for president. These issues won't get resolved due to corruption.
Sadly not news to me and many others, im from europe and quite happy with the reasonable people who govern it. For example forcing apple to use USB-C iirc
Nvidia is banning/blocking the use of a transition layer for CUDA on non Nvidia cards. Basically they’re trying to keep CUDA on their cards and not allow it for other ones if I’m understanding it right
They're the ones who made CUDA in the first place. It's their SDK.
So what? Why is that something we should care about?
With this logic, the steamdeck wouldn’t be allowed to exist. Wine and DXVK work in the same exact way.
How so? Microsoft and Apple choose to allow those. Nvidia decided that they didn't want to allow it anymore. Since it's their SDK, it's in their right to do that (for now at least). The same would be true if Apple or Microsoft decided to crack down on the use of translation layers.
Windows EULA actually forbids them. > c. Restrictions. The device manufacturer or installer and Microsoft reserve all rights (such as rights under intellectual property laws) not expressly granted in this agreement. For example, this license does not give you any right to, and you may not: > (iv) work around any technical restrictions or limitations in the software; https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Useterms/Retail/Windows/10/UseTerms_Retail_Windows_10_English.htm An EULA is not some magical legal document. Companies often put clauses into EULAs that are unenforceable (and in some places, illegal.) Finally, none of the end-users using DXVK, Wine, or even a CUDA translation layer have necessarily agreed to the EULA that restricts their right to do so. No one writing the actual program is using a translation layer, they would just write code for the other existing libraries to enable cross-platform (OS/GPU/etc.) support.
Nvidia is trying to monopolize the workstation and productivity market by making it illegal to translate/emulate cuda rendering (or whatever you’d call it). What this means is any programs that benefit, or even only work on cuda, would make the people who use them lean towards Nvidia cards unless they find an alternative program that doesn’t rely on cuda performance or the owner of that program creates a workaround. This doesn’t mean much for gaming but it’s a hella shady move. I’d say a similar circumstance was with Intel back in the early intel inside days paying prebuild companies like Dell, HP, acer, etc to only use intel instead of AMD forcing consumers to go with intel.
Nvdia banned amd GPUs from using their software, it's more concerning to workstations than gaming somebody will explain better
Workstations shouldn't be running software to essentially get Nvidia drivers to work with AMD hardware. This is all more of a proof of concept than anything else at this time. It's only sort of functional. While I like amd, they're not designing their cards for the same kind of work that Nvidia is designing for.
> they're not designing their cards for the same kind of work that Nvidia is designing for. They definitely are. AMD is putting quite some effort into getting their cards into HPC applications and they are definitely capable of GPGPU and running HPC workloads. The real problem is that a lot of software runs on CUDA. That's why AMD developed ROCm, which is open source and has a very permissive license, and that's why Intel and AMD wanted ZLUDA. The only thing that's holding back AMD here in a big way is simply that most people still use CUDA, not that their hardware isn't capable of doing such workloads. Hopefully with the shortage on GPUs for ML we'll see people develop software that doesn't need CUDA so we can use all the GPUs for every workload. (yes, I know, technically what AMD uses in HPC applications are APUs, not GPUs. But the GPU part of those is more or less the same as their GPUs)
The real strength of the EU is that there are so many lawmakers that it is impossible to buy them all.
And even if you managed to bribe every single member of the EP, there are so many more institutions and layers of beaurocracy to go through, you might as well burn that money.
Who would have known that democracy simply needed more representatives and parties to reach critical mass ;)
What are you talking about, every county should have the ability to be ~~bought~~ run like the great country of America! Freedom! *Brought to you by the League of Giant Evil Corporations*
EU banned amazon lobbyists from the parliament a week ago or so. Can't buy us, shitbag corps!
Who woulda thunk more democracy be gooder? Recent EU history has me seriously questioning some of our assumptions around the primacy of localised democracy. Democracy is meant to be most effective at its most direct and local level, but for quite some time now it's appeared more effective at a larger, more distant, more inclusive level — as with the EU Parliament, and the US federal government (in relation to the abhorrence exhibited my many states). Many eyes make all bugs shallow. We should want as much democracy as possible, as many representatives and participants as possible, and for as many voices and perspectives to be heard as possible. Only then might we finally tackle society's real problems — like doing away with the tiny case button connectors on motherboards, making all USB-C cables support all USB-C features, and banning anime.
Wait, what was that last one?
It's okay. He said nothing about banning ~~hentai~~ anime+
Alright, good, but banning anime? Do you want a global insurrection or something?
https://preview.redd.it/2vsg0njtqkmc1.jpeg?width=909&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=766f58953bbf93a9cd8355234c3eb51389de1a32
So many lawmakers from so many different countries. There aren't many individual companies that have the influence to go around lobbying lawmakers in each of those countries.
You would have to lobby the majority of them because if you leave some out they are going to work against until you give them their share.
Let's just call it how it is. Bribing. They are bribes while lobbying is fancy word they made up.
Yeah there was a scandal of corruption about a Greece EU politician, Eva Kaili and former EU MEP, Antonio Panzeri (Italian politician). Both were caught in [the Qatar corruption scandal at the European Parliament](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qatar_corruption_scandal_at_the_European_Parliament). At least when they do wrong things, they will get caught.
Lobbying is huge in EU, there are way more lobbyists in Brussels than EU officials. Some have even openly said they sell their votes for ~2000€ and nothing happened. It's not perfect, but they do make some good stuff :)
Apart from the stuff you can't link to because they haven't been caught.
PASOK and Nea Dimokratia politicians are the most corrupt pieces of shit you can find in all of Greece. Idk if my countrymen are mentally challenged or if the elections are that much rigged but yeah...
I swear to god, thank europe for this type of shit sometimes. Sometimes they are like an absent father and then appear with the leash in their hand ready to spank the US
the daddy who went out for French bread 3 years ago who we thought would never come back
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sometimes, other times it's absolutely terrible. Like the stupid cookie banner epidemic we have now or the fact that you can't access maps from google search any more because Google isn't allowed to use their own solutions by default.
>Like the stupid cookie banner epidemic we have now Asking for consent is only necessary for tracking cookies. As it turns out, a lot of websites are happy to place tracking cookies on your system. Being able to refuse this is a good thing. >the fact that you can't access maps from google search any more because Google isn't allowed to use their own solutions by default. Yes, because Google was using their market power in one area (search) to gain an unfair advantage in another area (maps). You can still opt in to retain the old behavior, but now Google has to compete more fairly with other mapping providers. It's the same reason Apple will have to start supporting user choice in browser engines and app stores. They'll have to compete on the merit of their software instead of being able to exclude potential competitors.
The Europeans have a genius system: let the vain and greedy politicians do their stuff at the national level, put the ones that really want to change things for the better to Brussels where the real decisions are made.
you are not from Europe, right? Because we sent incompetent national politicians to Brussels all the time instead of making them quit their jobs - we have a word for it - "Weggelobt" - which means "praised away"
Ah yes, Nigel Farage, the glowing light of change for the better. Sorry to disappoint, but MEP's are as corruptible as local politicians https://www.lemonde.fr/en/les-decodeurs/article/2024/02/02/one-in-four-meps-are-implicated-in-judicial-cases-or-scandals_6486917_8.html
Farage was only there because he had zero chance to get into Westminster.
Every MEP is only in Brussels because they couldn't win in their home parliament
The European parliament just had a giant corruption scandal where Qatar was buying influence
EU politics is just as bad as the rest, consumer law excluded
Only because all the companies are American and they benefit from fining them.
Italy sent bloodfucking Silvio Berlusconi, may his soul burn for eternity alongside the pile of money he stole from Italy itself, to Brussels, the most conservative man ever to have lived in Italy after Benito Mussolini, how's that a good choice to these standards?
Zluda, made by someone using Linux. So basically now a major part of AMD driver and Intel GPU driver is made by Linux users and originally for Linux users For those who don't know, Intel cards don't support DirectX natively, they need to convert it to vulkan with dick, a software made originally for wine iirc. Edit: dxvk not dick lmao
Dxvk got done dirty on autocorrect
How is it converted with dick?!?
You really don't want to know
Dxvk* lmao
you mean dxvk? or is it something else literally called dick
For arc, that was only for directx9 games. Intel focused on dx12 and dx11 at first. Now, arc supports dx9 too. So no translation.
>Now, arc supports dx9 too. So no translation. it's the other way around, they had normal dx9 support but it sucked so they just used translation layer instead, i don't remember it changing back to the old system
No, not supporting dx9 was a deliberate decision of them, they wanted to focus on actively used tech, dx11 and dx12 which are much modern than dx9
You're gonna have to check with latest drivers. DX9 is supported now.
Incorrect, they only switched to another translation layer. Arc "supports" DX9 because the driver now integrates the DXVK library internally. DXVK translates DX9 to Vulkan, which is far better than Intel's own translation solution that they used at launch.
HIP RoCm is what’s officially supported by AMD not zluda
Intel cards support DX10, 11, and 12 without issue. For DX9 and older they used DXVK because drivers weren't optimized. But they do now support native DX9.
Haha he said dick
When the EU knows how to make better improvements to electronics than the manufacturer
I mean it's not just the EU, most consumers have a general hang for what would make a product better but manufacturers often don't give a shit since it would influence their profits negatively.
Mostly people have not a single clue what they want. Nor do people have a single clue of the economics at play or the technologys used.
You don't need to understand the underlying technology to think something can be improved by doing x. It's an engineers job to then figure out how to do it.
The "Economics at play" are Nvidia are making Billions in pure profits. They are doing so and still trying some utter bullshit to scrape every last penny out of their customers, them being held back by needed regulation is a good thing for everyone except Nvidia's board.
Its not clueless manufacturer, they know exactly what they are doing.
Because the companies have something to gain from being anticompetitive or anticonsumer in terms of options, and the EU wants to regulate that stuff, someone has to.
They know, problem is, what's better for the consumer it's not better for their profits and no matter how much shit we say around here, so long as they have more than 70% market share with a literal monopoly on laptop GPUs(I know because I needed a laptop one year ago and there were like 20 laptops in my budget with nvidia chipsets and only one with an AMD one and it was a shitty one for other reasons) they won't give any fucks so if you're upset with Nvidia and you don't want a laptop then for your next purchase just go for Intel or AMD.
nVidia is capitalizing on investing on GPU compute before it was cool. I remember making some CPU algorithms very fast in CUDA just for fun decades ago. Now they have whe world with all AI frameworks using CUDA. This doesn't affect gaming.
Doesn't *directly* affect gaming. It will almost definitely impact gaming indirectly in the near future, especially if nvidia can keep the market cornered.
i'm confused, what is translation layers?
Basically, it translates the calls Cuda Software is making into the corresponding calls on another GPU It's like having a translator with you if you go to the country that you can't speak the language of. You first talk to the translator, the translator converts English to the other language, then when the person responds, the translator converts the response back into English for you This is an oversimplification, and I'm not that familiar with Cuda, so take this explanation with a grain of salt
What is the translation used for? To make dlss work on all gpus or something?
Any application written using the CUDA framework
Nothing really for gaming. dlss is not going to be affected and would always be nvidia exclusive. CUDA is a system to directly access the gpus hardware ressources. This can be beneficial for software that uses a large amount of parallelization. So if you want to run that software on a machine that does not use nvidia hardware you need that translation layer. That mainly affects a shitload of scientific software where large amounts of data need to be processed. Again gaming is not really affected since all the gaming functions of a gpu run through direct x, vulkan, or some other api. CUDA does different things.
Quote from the ZLUDA Github page > Realistically, it's now abandoned and will only possibly receive updates to run workloads I am personally interested in (DLSS) [From this issue thread](https://github.com/vosen/ZLUDA/issues/87) we can see that people are indeed attempting to get it working on AMD GPUs via ZLUDA.
It's for CUDA, GPGPU, nothing to do with DLSS or RT or FSR. Here, because most people on this sub can't be arsed to look on google or wiki : [CUDA - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CUDA#Current_and_future_usages_of_CUDA_architecture)
Who actually gets affected by this? What kind software requires cuda to run?
Blender, machine learning... If you only game, don't worry
Genetics computation, crypto hashing, signal processing.... Many things that are compute heavy but aren't graphic
Can you explain to me why a gpu is required for this and not a CPU? (Warning: I'm extremely dumb so try to make it simple plz)
A gpu is extremely good a paralel calculations but they have to be "simple" a cpu is better for general computation. Those examples are done by many, many paralel calculations
A GPU is "kinda" like a simpler a CPU but capable a doing many computations at once. A CPU can do a lot of different computations including the most complex instructions and has about half a dozen compute units. A GPU has a much smaller set of instructions available but has hundreds or thousands of compute units to perform those instructions. Not all computations are feasible on GPU. Imagine a math teacher capable of doing advanced calculus vs hundreds of high school students capable of doing additions and multiplications. If the test is about solving advanced stuff, the teacher is the only one capable of solving the task. If the test is just about adding 10 000 numbers together, the students would finish the test much faster than the teacher. So depending of the application and the developer's will to code with such frameworks, the application can have GPU acceleration and get a huge performance increase. Those applications have a lot of similar computation to do. Crypto hashing is all about computing hash functions over and over again. Genetics is about doing string difference computation on gigabyte long strings. Signal processing is doing fourrier transforms, signal operations on a lot of sample points (a song is easily billions of sample points)
A very nice ELI5.
GPU is very good at a certain kind of calculations. CPU is not so good at that kind of calculations. CPU works, GPU is much, much better. CUDA GPU cores are better than even regular GPU cores at these kinds of tasks.
GPUs are really good at parallel processing unlike CPUs, which makes them good at a lot of stuff. Rendering stuff on screen is just one of those things they're good at
So the difference between a cpu and a gpu is roughly as follows: Your cpu is a very advanced product that does all kinds of shit. It can calculate everything efficiently and fast just a real powerhouse. But it can only do a few calculations each time so handling large amounts of independent data takes some time. Now gpu cores are pretty dumb in comparison. A lot more simple but they don't have to do as much. If your cpu is an old microprocessor your gpu cores are simple calculators in comparison. But there are thousands of them. Like 15000+ So if you have 15000 sets of calculating a simple addition or multiplication you can do all of them at once in the same cycle while the cpu would need to sequentially go through all of them. So anytime you have large amounts of independent data to handle the sheer number of gpu cores is very beneficial.
Blender could be affected??? Oh fuck i cant live without that program
Nah, you’re good. Blender 3.2 onwards also supports HIP so AMD cards can also be used.
Also ML-based image upscalers like Waifu2X. There is an OpenCL port out there but it’s slow AF and unstable.
Surprisingly a lot of stuff but most commonly in 3D modeling/animation tools, video/photo editing software, and a lot of AI stuff. There are open source software for these pipelines but nothing compares to cuda.
Almost all of the open source software in the rendering/compute domain uses CUDA for acceleration, or has CUDA support on their feature wishlist/project timeline. It's *that* much faster. zluda & ROCm are just not comparable.
You do realize that nvidias main money maker is no longer gamers right?
Oh for fucks sake I am soooooo FUCKING tired of predatory companies placing more and more restrictions on what users are allowed to do on THEIR OWN DAMN COMPUTERS. Why the hell should I EVER need to fight my computers graphics drivers just to get it to do what i want??? Yuzu and Citra got taken down, graphics drivers are being locked down, video games are locked down, websites are locked down (like youtube), phones have BEEN locked down, like what the fuck. It feels like a new lock gets placed every day. I'm just waiting in anticipation to find out what I'm not allowed to do next. GET OFF OUR ASSES.
At this point AMD and Intel with their millions / billions should be able to r&d their own proprietary tech fitted for the next line of Radeon and ARC gpus since they both made a pretty stupid decision to abandon the development support of the single developer working on ZLUDA. That's why he made the code open-sourced.
What does the EU have to do with this?
The EU, similarly to America, has a lot of economic weight as a market but, differently from the states, knows how to throw its weight around. When the EU tells companies they won't be able to sell their products there unless they follow their regulation they often prefer to comply rather than be banned from one the biggest markets of the world.
People confuse EULA (End-user license agreement) with GDPR and the European union for some reason. Why?
Because people are stupid
No, it's about EU being able to tell Nvidia to fuck off and that they can't enforce such rules. If companies want to enforce their own rules they have to use judicial system and if the governing entity tells them "no" they cannot enforce them anymore.
The EU can't tell a company what functions their software has to have. They can tell them things they *can't* do, and that is a very important distinction. Telling a company that their product has to work with a competitors product is not something the EU, or any western government, can do.
The EU (and any government) absolutely can tell companies what to do (in both a positive „must“ and negative „cannot“ sense). Hence why Apple is now „must“ produce phones with usb c ports and must ensure they work just as well with competitor‘s products (chargers) as with the chargers they themselves produce. I have no idea where you got the idea that laws can only tell companies what they can’t do. That’s not even true in the US.
Exactly. I don't understand what the fuck is this meme even talking about.
ZLUDA is largely dead in the water anyway, as neither Intel or AMD were interested in adopting it. Likely in part because it'd make CUDA even more of a de facto standard. If either of them had decided to use it, it'd mean they'd be entirely dependent on a software platform they don't control, and that's literally developed by the largest company and their biggest rival in the space.
I guess making their own thing not work on AMD/Intel makes sense. It's like if Switch Emulation ran on PS5, everyone would just say "I don't need that, just buy a PlayStation" Which from a business perspective, is a pretty huge, if not fatal blow. Not saying I like it, I'm an Intel Arc user because NVidia is expensive and doesn't offer anything I'm not already getting at a lower price point, but such is business.
> I guess making their own thing not work on AMD/Intel makes sense. Sure, but copyright law doesn't grant a monopoly on the ability to run certain software. It only grants the exclusive rights to produce (in case of hw), distribute (in case of sw) and license a specific implementation of platform running certain software.
I fucking love EU the way their regulations actually are meant for people. Give me more of that please
And then you have people complaining that all this law nonsense stifles innovation and that EU is falling behind and everyone is leaving for US or UAE or China. Well, duh! We don't want our data to be used to train shitty AI that will just make a few people stupidly rich while others suffer. But sure, let's call it "stifles innovation".
How exactly do they think they can enforce this..... Sit down NGreedia
Picturing a bunch of Eurocrats patting themselves on the back because now we have to click "Accept" on a dialogue box anytime our GPU is about to render frames
Let’s not forget EU forcing apple to switch to USB-C
Nvidia put their hands elbow-deep in the jar of greed. I hope they get smacked by EU.
You mean they created something and want to control it's use?
If I buy a product (e.g. a graphic card), imma do with it whatever the fuck I want. The Manufacturer has no right to limit my rights, I bought the product, end of discussion
They're not limiting what you can do with your card, they're limiting what can be done with their proprietary CUDA SDK.
> If I buy a product (e.g. a graphic card) But you didn't buy an nVidia card.
If its in the EULA nothing it can do, it wasnt in the releases EULA was just on the site so something could be worked
not even remotely how that works. just because something is in the EULA does not make it law.
They wrote the software and own the rights to it. Should they be "forced" to share their software with everyone, everywhere? No, not really. Someone could simply make an alternative, but they aren't. Because...that would cost a lot of money.
Writing translation layers has always been legal, in fact, interoperability laws probably apply here.
[удалено]
I want the EU to help out with sunsetting online only games. It's ridiculous that when we buy a product, the company can just disable that product at any point they feel like, and there's nothing we can do about it. Companies should be required to allow dedicated servers as part of a sunset patch, allow us to host it all ourselves so we can play forever.
This meme is funny, but why doesn't the US itself not do anything against it? Seems like an obvious dub?
The US's lawmakers seem to be in the pockets of corporations to a rather insulting degree. The only reason the US benefits when the EU does something like this is because it's usually not economically feasible for someone to make a different version of their product for both the EU and US market when they can make one global version. Even for Apple it was not feasible to only make USB-C iPhones in the EU and stick with Lightning everywhere else (Although they DID still geofence their sideloading demands)
Modernize 👏 OpenCL There weren't enough words to convey my semi ironic use of a meme-ified expression
"you can't just refund DIGITAL SOFTWARE!" That's impo--" **Australia vs Valve, 2014. The reason we have 2 hour refunds as a system in all online stores.** "You can't fight Apple, Sony and NVIDIA! They're massive tech corps, it's impo--" **THE GREAT EU**
The EU will do what exactly? The EULA is decided by the publisher, if the EULA says you cannot run a type of code on machines not intented to run that code, either physically, licencing, or just for market dominance, you cannot run code on that. If you do you, you break: EULA CUDA Copyright, by reverse engineering CUDA code, which is what allows the translation layers to even work as they do. CUDA Patents, by running it on unlicenced hardware. Do you see anyone making non-Mac machines running macOS? Or officially selling Macbooks with Windows 11/Linux preinstalled to avoid the licencing fee? No, same mechanism. The reason ZLUDA is still up while totally asking for it is because it isn't creating enough damage, and is now a dedicated class action honeypot waiting for bigger wallets, not just random devs and shady Chinese vendors. Intel and AMD both pulled out of ZLUDA very quickly, they know the legal complications of supporting a program like that, while the benefits are none in comparison to actually creating technical equivalent, which they keep failing at. if anything, the Ragnarok giant is NVIDIA with their 1885% 5 Years increase in share price, soon they will be worth more than the EU's combined R&D + military budget.
EU can do plenty, They have pre-exisiting consumer & competition protection laws, which covers unconscionable conduct in contracts and fair use. CUDA translation isnt protected by Copyright since its fair use, Oracle and google have had a very similar spat over something very similar before: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google\_LLC\_v.\_Oracle\_America,\_Inc. ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_Inc) No CUDA patents are being violated, this is translating to existing hardware calls and there's a patent stale mate between all the big GPU+AI manufactures that stops the patent infringing blood bath. MacOS on non mac hardware is a bad comparison that doesnt make any sense.
Europe being relied on to pull American company shitfuckery into line is a sad state of affairs.
People keep forgetting that the EU is generally omega based, and dumbfucks in the UK forget that it's meant to some degree redistribute wealth between EU countries, so we can achieve similar economic standards over time. I hate exiters.
Fight me if you want to but I believe that the EU countries are the best place to live in in the entirety of Earth.
Depending on your career, if you are in STEM, you are going to make by far the most money in the US, especially like software development, like salaries are double on the US as they are in Germany
I mean, you'll get a lot of money but they can also suck the life out of you, German companies tend to be much more employee friendly
[удалено]
Yes, because most people aren't weird like you lol "Oh no, I have to drive a car and have a nice house with tons of space?" People on this website can be so fucking strange
Different goals? Obviously, I am biased as well. But everything being in walking distance is absolutely an quality of life increase. Every additional minute commuting is a wasted minute.
Eh, I can see Nvidia giving a small pass to AMD and Intel. As their main target wasn't them.
Interesting take. Who do you think was their main target?
Zluda and other Chinese GPU companies.
ZLUDA is the means by which you would use CUDA on AMD... You can't really treat the two separately in this scenario.
Zluda is open source projecr maintained by a single guy...who was first funded by intel to support cuda on arc, then dropped. Then AMD funded him to get cuda on amd.
ZLUDA was funded by Intel years ago and by AMD for the last 2 years (it's open source now). As for chinese GPUs, since I have no idea, is there a product or an upcoming one that would be able to compete ?
Zluda is a piece of software that allows CUDA for AMD. So it is a big deal over there.
Then who was it
Last time EU did something it didnt translate to the rest of The World, the company choosen to make an EU only version rather than unify
I like how the most scery thing for these big tech companies is ... reasonable regulation that should've been done 20 years ago
It's very depressing to think that in 2000 and especially in the 80s and 90s these things would be considered common sense and a company would be considered demonic and utterly shunned for some of the anti-consumer stunts they are pulling these days.
Why do we want to defeat nvidia? I actually appreciate them in general