← Back to context

Comment by silisili

7 hours ago

I assume it's because nvidia is a hardware company that produces world class hardware, and it's a compiler to target that.

Whereas mojo is a general purpose language, and we're absolutely spoiled for choice on modern languages with open source compilers.

I'm not saying it's fair or right, I still think mojo is neat, but isn't exactly comparing apples to apples.

We can stop with these weak excuses since AMD and Intel have done more for open source than Nvidia has, including their GPU drivers for Linux.

Nvidia on the other hand has not and the best they have done is a bunch of closed-source blobs which they do more closed source releases than the rest.

Mojo is open source and targets all GPU architectures for their compiler regardless of the vendor and nvcc targets their own (and both that and CUDA are closed source).

So this is directly an apples to apples comparison.

  • I'll give credit to Intel, they've always been open source friendly and I prefer to buy them because I'm not a gamer, so don't need the best.

    AMD is another story. Their binary closed source blobs were even worse than nvidias for many years. So much so people used terrible performance open source tries just to avoid the headache. That they finally slopped together an open source version after they'd lost the GPU race isn't exactly noble. But as an open source supporter in general, I commend the effort still.