-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 408
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Feature]: Add ROCm for Windows support #1880
Comments
SQUEEEEEE!!! |
If anyone finds any more requirements that need porting, post them here as well. I didn't do a deep dive into which all is needed beyond pyTorch and MIOpen. |
Can't wait to see what the performance is like (and more importantly get access to the full extent of SD features various UIs support). I've been using Shark... It supports LoRas... and that's it, but has to recompile for every combination of model, LoRA, resolution, and sometimes prompt length but from benchmarks I've found laying around it's faster than anything but high end NVidia modules in SD2.1 image generation under that compilation method. The problem is the inflexibility of the build system and how much disk space it starts eating up after you mess around with multiple model / lora combinations. directml is a huge speed drop and memory management eats in comparison. I kind of figured this was coming since the late June agility SDK hardware scheduling drivers accidentally included an amdhip64.dll but it's nice to see it was faster than I'd thought. I'll be keeping an eye out here for news. :D |
rocm windows not support my gpu (amd rx 560), guess i stay on hackintosh |
There is also this handy chart on the differences between ROCm on Linux and Windows: https://rocm.docs.amd.com/en/latest/rocm.html#rocm-on-windows |
I don't want to open a new issue or anything just for this so I allow myself to comment here. Positive point though: generating a basic pic was indeed really 10times faster on my 7900xt (I am really surprise how fast it is), but since I'm not insterested generating pics without hires/lora/checkpoints, I won't try more now. |
I added an experimental support for ONNX and Olive. Wiki |
There seems to be an Olive optimised model of Dreamshaper here; https://huggingface.co/softwareweaver/dreamshaper Since I'm still getting errors trying to convert models, I'll give this a try and report back. |
So, I'm very novice with git and repo/branch.
Not sure what to do. |
It's probably best to just clone a separate instance;
This will create the Olive branch in a folder called |
I actually tried that...... but for some reason I thought putting |
That last one can be anything; |
Well... nothing changed though. Same error. |
Thank you for reporting! I think the recent commits about paths corrupted the installation process. Will be fixed.. |
if you've merged dev recently, then yes. note that |
Fixed: 2fd8d2c |
That cannot go into base_requirements. And installing olive must be optional, not for every install. I can add |
I think so. But if it imports And I considered that but thought it was inappropriate because |
Let me take a look to morrow, I've handled module conflict before, never clean, but doable. |
@lshqqytiger lets move olive conversation to #2429 |
RoCk has an official released now at windows am i right? is there any plans to complete this task then? |
Source? |
Feature description
Since there seems to be a lot of excitement about AMD finally releasing ROCm support for Windows, I thought I would open a tracking FR for information related to it. Before it can be integrated into SD.Next, pyTorch needs to add support for it, and that also includes several other dependencies being ported to windows as well. Obviously no ETA is known for any of that work to be done and released.
Status:
Tracking Bugs/PRs from upstream projects:
Version Platform Description
AMD on Windows 10/11
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: