Hopefully now that AMD has money they can afford the headcount to fix their bugs and some more headcount to make up for 15 years of lost time in the applications that matter. Hopefully. But I trusted them twice and got burned, so this time I need to see proof before I jump. I need to see blender renders, I need to see torch trainings, I need to see NAMD (or insert science code here) running on a compatibility layer. It is unfortunate that the actual compatibility situation seems to have hardly moved at all in 10 years (it was right around the corner in 2013 too, you see) but the fundamentals are different now so I hold out hope.
OpenCL1.2 worked fine for all the test code I made for myself. But OpenCL 2.0 was... horrid. Unworkable.
--------
My next step personally is to give DirectX 12 computer shaders a serious try. A lot of people are also talking about Vulkan shaders, as apparently that works well on Linux too.
ROCm on Linux is fine enough. But this weirdness of having a feature on ROCm Windows (when ROCm Windows isn't even public yet?) is well... weird. I guess its cool that AMD has worked with the Windows team to get everything squared up, but it'd be nice if ROCm on Windows were available to the masses.