5 ms·
the only beneficiary of this are the hardware vendors.. nvidia and amd. and startups which get these foundation models for free. because language models are a
by emmender1 3y ago
the only beneficiary of this are the hardware vendors.. nvidia and amd. and startups which get these foundation models for free.
because language models are a complementary product, and the complement must be commoditized as a strategy.
I see AMD as a bigger beneficiary, since, very soon, amd will equal nvidia for inference and fine-tuning, but amd has a long way to go to equal in foundation model training.
- smoldesu 3y ago> and startups which get these foundation models for free. It's licensed non-commercially, so I'm not sure what those startups stand to gain. > since, very soon, amd will equal nvidia for inference and fine-tuning Source? If you're referring to Olive, it is indeed impressive but also has caveats: 1. It is just as proprietary as CUDA or CoreML. 2. You need a copy of Windows and licensed DirectX to use those optimizations. 3. AMD only matches Nvidia's inferencing performance when comparing Olive to Pytorch. Olive-to-Olive comparisons will still reflect an Nvidia lead. I don't think AMD has the capability to equal Nvidia in the short-term. It will take longtime software investments from across the industry to shake Nvidia's yoke.
- artninja1988 3y agoLlama2 is not licensed non-commercially. There was some weird provisions about not having more than 1 billion users at llama launch though