正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

AMD's Anush Elangovan explains why he thinks his company's open source ethos combined with agentic AI superpowers their leverage as a company: Because AMD publishes a lot of technical details about its hardware, when engineers use AI tools, the models already “understand” AMD’s systems and can help write code...

35,131 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

9 条评论

Michael Stan 的头像
Michael Stan6 个月前

Open source is the fastest way to build trust with engineers. When you publish your technical details, you're not just sharing code. You're sharing your roadmap. AI tools can read that roadmap and build on top of it. That's how you create an ecosystem. I've always believed in transparency. When I was rebuilding from zero, the only people who helped me were the ones who had been open about their own failures. Closed systems protect companies. Open systems build communities.

Andy 的头像
Andy6 个月前

Anush makes a fair point, and there's logic to it, but looking at reality, CUDA still dominates by a wide margin. The amount of existing code, libraries, examples, and the developer community around NVIDIA is just on a completely different level compared to AMD. Sure, you can say "every model understands AMD," but these models understand NVIDIA way deeper and broader than that. And even if we assume models now understand AMD really well, that's not where the real battle is. At the end of the day, what a developer actually cares about is real-world performance and inference speed, not how well the AI knows the hardware. If AMD's ecosystem is slower or less mature, developers will keep choosing NVIDIA regardless of everything else. Now the "Agentic acceleration loop" idea, where models automatically generate Triton and HIP kernels and optimize performance on their own, that's genuinely interesting, because it could gradually reduce the need for manual CUDA expertise, which would chip away at one of NVIDIA's strongest advantages. But that path isn't complete yet, and we're still very much in the early stages

hanzi 的头像
hanzi6 个月前

@AnushElangovan This is a really underrated compounding loop: public specs/code make models better at your stack, which makes builders ship more examples, which feeds the next models. For agent-heavy workflows, openness becomes distribution + developer enablement, not just philosophy.

Paula Vazquez 的头像
Paula Vazquez6 个月前

The wrapper is not the moat. The real advantage is a model readable ecosystem: open specs, docs, source trails, tooling, governance, and control surfaces. When agents can understand the stack, they can accelerate it. Open source feeds the model. The model feeds the ecosystem. The ecosystem compounds… >

Somi 的头像
Somi6 个月前

@AnushElangovan open docs help but the actual code corpus is still mostly CUDA. models default to nvidia syntax even with amd docs in context.

David Geoghegan 的头像
David Geoghegan6 个月前

@AnushElangovan the open-docs-as-training-data effect is the part of amd's open source story that gets undersold. the more technical detail you publish, the better the models do at recommending your stack to engineers. it's a quiet distribution channel that compounds.

Devin NFT Hunter 的头像
Devin NFT Hunter6 个月前

@AnushElangovan amd built the ai playground for devs, they get it

Dangcing Chan 的头像
Dangcing Chan6 个月前

Love that AMD’s transparency gives AI models a head start — makes sense why their chips are hot for agentic work. Curious: does this openness extend to firmware docs too? (Also, just shipped a new dubbing pipeline at DangcingAI — feels like the same philosophy, but for video 🎥)

Jeff Tatarchuk 的头像
Jeff Tatarchuk6 个月前

@AnushElangovan 🚀

相关视频

Some time ago, I had the idea to port NVIDIA Physical AI stack to AMD. The motivation was to improve hardware diversity and enable world models and VLAs to run beyond a single ecosystem. We started with NVIDIA Cosmos Predict 2.5-2B. Porting wasn’t trivial: these models are deeply optimized for NVIDIA’s stack. We used this as an opportunity to apply our ROCm kernels. The results were surprising: Both encode and diffusion run faster on AMD Instinct MI300X vs. NVIDIA H200 (FA3) and we still saw significant headroom for further optimization. Quality is unchanged across modalities (validated with WorldJen) To be clear, this is no luck. We have deep experience with diffusion models and AMD GPUs. But this just gives us a good opportunity to get closer to a true hardware-to-hardware comparison, as we work with less software abstractions than usual. Just to give an example, on AMD, memory instructions are async with a hardware queue of ordered pending instructions, enabling concurrent load/store with compute without warp specialization. Bottom line: there are real architectural advantages on AMD, if you take the time to work with the hardware. Note, we did tradeoff ~20% higher memory usage, That being said, AMD has more to give to begin with :) in the coming weeks: AMD versions of Cosmos Transfer and GR00T, an even faster version of Cosmos Predict, and open-sourcing an attention kernel faster than AITER v3 (which is closed-source for some reason? cc: Anush Elangovan )

Omer Shlomovits

36,678 次观看 • 6 个月前

Dylan Patel of SemiAnalysis says a worse GPU with better storage and memory now beats the best chip without them, so buying the newest GPU alone no longer wins inference. So, an AMD GPU with more memory can outperform Nvidia in some cases. "So what we have is we have over $80 million of compute, GPUs from Nvidia, AMD, TPUs from Google, Trainium from Amazon, and we run this benchmark constantly on the newest inference engine, newest drivers, newest PyTorch version, whatever it is." "Every day it runs on an automated CI, and we run it on all the latest Chinese models, from GLM, Zhipu, Moonshot, Kimi, Alibaba, all these models we run." "Initially, when we were benchmarking the difference between these chips and different engines, different schemes for parallelism, we were just running it fixed context length." "But now with Agent X, we've analyzed over $5 million worth of Claude Code traces. This is real production traffic that people have donated to us as well as internally generated. Now we know what the actual agent workload looks like." "And then as we implement that and run those benchmarks, it turns out yes, the chip you're using is very important, but now even more important is how are you handling this memory offload?" "And so while an Nvidia GPU is faster than an AMD GPU in most cases, because AMD GPUs have more memory, they actually end up outperforming in some cases." "Or you can have a worse GPU, but a much better storage solution, and now you can outperform what the best GPU can do without those solutions. So just buying the newest and latest GPU alone doesn't get you the best inference economics." "Actually, you need to layer in all these other innovations including storage and memory." [ Who's the top player on your chart? ] "That really is a difficult multivariable problem. And generally that means you need to have, yes, you need to have the best GPU, a GB300, but you also need to have the best storage solutions. And so I won't spoil who's the best right here, but I will say that storage solutions matter a lot and memory solutions matter a lot, as does your front-end networking. That matters a lot."

Fireside Alpha

185,279 次观看 • 3 个月前

David Friedberg: Frontier Models are Training on Your Novel Insights as “De-Identified Data” @jason: “Should they trust any of these LLMs with their proprietary knowledge for fear of having it cribbed into a core LLM?” david friedberg: “I have had experiences where we've asked some fairly novel scientific questions, and (the AI model) identifies it as a novel insight. It's like, ‘Oh, never thought about that, interesting, blah, blah, blah.’ And then using a different account, asking the next version (of the model) later, I've now experienced this. It's like, ‘Oh, well, you could do this,’ and it actually just describes this exact thing that we had in our chat in the previous version. Now, these are a handful of anecdotal experiences, but I know the domain that we work in, and the niche of it, and the ideation of this stuff, and the novelty of this stuff, and the lack of papers being published, and so on. So I know that there isn't some new corpus of information out there that's training the new model. So all I can say at that point is that my conversation or our analyses have been used for training.” David Sacks: “Okay, this does raise a really good question. What does it mean that the model is allowed to train on unidentifiable data?” Friedberg: “Well, that's my point. So it doesn't use any of my personal information, but it can use an insight derived from our chat, which it can then say is some training data that is unrelated. But the truth is, it's actually a piece of IP that's our organization’s IP, and our engagement back and forth. We don't have any NDA or confidentiality provisions or protections with them being a service provider back to us. This is why I care a lot about open source because I don't want them having my chat logs because they can use it for training to create an IP advantage that is now diffused to the rest of the market.”

The All-In Podcast

56,782 次观看 • 1 个月前