None of those are both portable and widely available on end user machines, which is needed for games
CUDA seems nice, but being Nvidia only makes it a total dead end.
Disclaimer: I work on AMD ROCm, but my opinions are my own.
There's also HIP[1], which can be used as a thin wrapper around CUDA, or with the ROCm backend on AMD platforms. It doesn't yet match CUDA in either breadth of features or maturity, but it's getting closer every day.
As I understand it, that has to work for the CORAL 2 US "exascale", so people who've been proved fairly right so far obviously have some confidence in it. (de Supinksi of Livermore said he'd be out of a job if conventional wisdom was right, though it was pretty obvious at the time that it wasn't.)
Free software too, praise be.
It looks good but without Intel iGPU support I don't think any gamedevs would use it :/
I wish all the GPU companies would get together and make a standard based on C++ and stick with it.
I believe the ML community will strongly disagree. CUDA is everything
Because the academic ML community does not care about shipping product to end users not equipped in nVidia.
Except SYSCL also works on AMD and Intel, and also has a CUDA backend, but apparently you missed that part.
In what concerns commercial uses of CUDA, Hollywood doesn't seem to have any problem with it, nor the car manufacturers with Jetson.
SYSCL might be an option, but it doesn't seem to have much in the way of adoption(Forum is dead)which is concerning.
It does look like Intel is supporting at least, so maybe in the future it will be a good option.
Also one of the reasons CUDA won developer love is that it fully embraced polyglot programming on the GPU.