43
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 May 2026
43 points (92.2% liked)
Linux
13785 readers
445 users here now
A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)
Also, check out:
Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The article is very misleading, but the real gist is that all of these AI dipshits figured out what FPGA was, and are now flooding the zone to use it. This tool has been an absolute gift to companies looking to move to FPGA for things like ML workflows, NL processing, and semantic flows, WITHOUT needing the dumb shit GPU pricing. Better results, cheaper bills.
AMD is two steps ahead of the game in these arenas versus Nvidia, and people just figured it out, so of course they are going to start charging for it. It uses resources on their end, so they need to bill for it to make it make sense. The same way every dumbass startup gives shit away to get you hooked is the way this works.
FPGA is going to usurp the reliance on CUDA in a massive way in the next few years, and they want to get paid for the upfront work they put in to make this possible.
Not shocked at all.
But then why is it still free on Windows? Remove the basic tier entirely, then.
Especially if you're correct that is a server/client system, then someone will just soon up a Docker container that has all of Windows 11 LTE and the Windows version of this pre-configured, so people can continue to use it in Linux anyway, or switch to an open-source alternative. They're already supporting and releasing Linux builds, so this doesn't seem to gain them anything and, instead, may cost them marketshare and goodwill.
I'm confused.
Doesn't AMD sell the hardware? Isn't it end-users (or companies or whatever) that are running the hardware? So I'm a bit confused, what do you mean by AI dipshits "using" AMD's resources -- especially when it's still available for free on Windows?
It's a client/server app at the end of the day. Free users still expend resources on AMD's end, and it's not solely client-side. If it costs them money, they will of course try to negate or recover the costs of that.
I don't know the software, but is the client/server model necessary, or is it to ensure AMD can enforce price rises when they want?
Not shaming, but I think you should understand what client/server means before asking that question.
You're looking for an answer on which to place some unfounded rage where you don't even understand the situation.