alt Hacker NewsYou misunderstand the point, and ROCm. The GPU and CPU share memory, that doesn't mean you don't need to interact with the GPU, anymore.
You can use Vulkan instead of ROCm on Radeon GPUs, including on the Strix Halo (and for a while, Vulkan was more likely to work on the Strix Halo, as ROCm support was slow to arrive and stabilize), but you need something that talks to the GPU.
Current ROCm, 7.2.1, works quite well on the Strix Halo. Vulkan does, too. ROCm tends to be a little faster, though. Not always, but mostly. People used to benchmark to figure out which was the best for a given model/workload, but now, I think most folks just assume ROCm is the better choice and use it exclusively. That's what I do, though I did find Gemma 4 wouldn't work on ROCm for a little bit after release (I think that was a llamma.cpp issue, though).
> The GPU and CPU share memory, that doesn't mean you don't need to interact with the GPU, anymore.
But we already have software that talks to the GPU; mesa3d and the ecosystem around that. It has existed for decades. My understanding was that the main reasons not to use it was that memory management was too complicated and CUDA solved that problem.
If memory gets unified, what is the value proposition of ROCm supposed to be over mesa3d? Why does AMD need to invent some new way to communicate with GPUs? Why would it be faster?