> And if they do care about the data center that much and ROCm becomes a thing for compute, they will want as many people as possible to be able to experiment with ROCm at home. So that they demand data centers with ROCm.

The engineers know this and have tried to explain this to upper management, but upper management only listens to "customer interviews" which consists of management from data centers. Upper management does not care about what engineers hear from customers because those are not the customers they care about.

ROCm has been a thing for four years now, Cuda had been around almost a decade before ROCm was conceived, and AMD still doesn't show any interest in an accessible compute platform for all developers and users. I think they should focus on OpenCL and Sycl.

Well it's a chicken and egg problem.

Without major library support nobody cares about ROCm, if nobody cares about ROCm AMD management will focus on other things.

But PyTorch just laid that egg.

As far as ROCm support on consumer products, it is strictly a management problem which will takes years for them to figure out since they do not listen to their engineers and do not view users of consumer graphics cards as compute customers.

I would love an alternative to Nvidia cards. After waiting for so long for ROCm support for RDNA cards and reading an engineer's comments about why there is no support yet, I've given up on AMD for compute support on their graphics cards. I'm hoping Intel's graphic cards aren't garbage and get quick support. I probably will buy an Nvidia card before then if I have the opportunity since I'm tired of waiting for an alternative.