As has been pointed out, the author's association of OpenCL with AMD is off base. But to me, the real misdirection of this article is the un-qualified assumption that OpenCL is the next big thing in GPGPU. In OpenCL and CUDA (both very low-level APIs), a lot of code must be written to move and manipulate data structures between the host and device (and back). The real breakthrough will be when compilers start supporting GPUs and do this for you. PGI already has added this to their C and Fortran compilers using OpenMP-style directives and it won't be long until Intel, GNU and the rest follow suit. Why spend your time writing in a language like OpenCL (which may be portable at a library-level, but never at a performance-level) when you can just recompile your existing code?

Using the fake penis experts from Wackypedia for your supporting evidence is one sure sign of ignorance.

Be that as it may be, however, I don't see where JHH and the rest of the lying, scabulous criminal organization known as nVidia should get any more credit for OpenCL than the other "neutralizing" partners.

Oh, and Roger in Spain, IBM doesn't knee-jerk. I've been around their operations long enough (as a contractor) to understand the deliberation processes. A Senior VP doesn't talk on the record unless the topic has been well-vetted internally.

nVidiots should just give up and go away. With IBM partnering with their, well, partners at AMD (pretty obvious, given their close working relationship), JHH and his fellow criminals stand about as much chance in the HPC market as a monkey with an abacus.

Organizations looking for HPC solutions aren't interested in talking with a mere chip designer. They talk with solution providers.

@ Jean:

Check your facts there.

"OpenCL was initially developed by Apple Inc., which holds trademark rights, and refined into an initial proposal in collaboration with technical teams at AMD, IBM, Intel, and Nvidia. Apple submitted this initial proposal to the Khronos Group. On June 16, 2008 the Khronos Compute Working Group was formed[1] with representatives from CPU, GPU, embedded-processor, and software companies. This group worked for five months to finish the technical details of the specification for OpenCL 1.0 by November 18, 2008.[2] This technical specification was reviewed by the Khronos members and approved for public release on December 8, 2008.[3]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL

Originally designed by Apple, who then created aconsortium of interested parties to refine it into a neutral, agreed standard that Khronos could endorse.

Check your facts fanboi. Sure Nvidia was involved with developing OpenCL, but it was pushing its own agenda on CUDA. AMD has been equally behind OpenCL from the get-go. Why single out Apple and Nvidia? AMD and Intel were both there, as too were many other companies who will never get recognition.

Apple was the first to integrate Open CL into something on your desktop: OS X. I don't think that actually comes close to the level of computing OpenCL is supposed to bring about in HPC.

Nvidia wanted CUDA to be the next big thing. They made it proprietary, royalty-free sure, but run only on Nv hardware. So nice of them... eh?

IBM also said they were planning on GPGPU solutions based on integrated integrated CPU+GPU computing. Unless Nvidia has pulled a CPU from out of thin air, where the heck did you conclude Nvidia is somehow a part of IBM's plan?

Maybe the phrasing isn't the best, granted.

@Deanjo

OpenCL was developed by Apple alright, but with colaboration of AMD, IBM, Intel AND Nvidia. They are not so big partner of the project, less than the others, they only want to make sure that they have a compatible product with the open standard, as it'd be bad to nVidia to have openCL AMD only.
Their focus is on CUDA only, as if anyone in HPC business with sane mind would strap himself with a nVidia only product.

"OpenCL-based co-processing - AMD's GPU stuff"

What? Givew credit where credit is due. When it came to development of openCL with Apple AMD/ATI had very little to do with it. openCL was modeled around CUDA and it's chief developers were Apple and Nvidia. The author of this article CLEARLY has no sniff about openCL and it's development. IBM and AMD are simply now saying what nvidia has been saying for years, HPC computings future is on GPU solutions where you want the most bang for the buck. Also openCL is not tied to GPU only solutions but can also be used with processors and DSP's. At least give the proper companies credit, Apple and Nvidia for bringing us openCL.

OpenCL is supported by Nvidia
You can program the cell with OpenCL.

they charged too flipping much!

I love to have the Cell in my TV. I love the cell on my smartphone. Who wouldn't?! But they charge the damn thin too much!

I can understand that it will be expensive for a system that have hundreds or thousands of Cell. Not for any consumer system that only have 1 or 2 Cell inside!

This is another marketing failure from IBM. They did it once for OS/2, now they did it again for Cell...

The potential for this is massive if the proper thinking and execution is allowed to play out. Read that no egos just scientists doing what they do best.
Oh and by the way, I am so very, very glad someone ( IBM) teams with AMD against NVidia for competition.
¨Gentlemen,Start your engines.¨