Gpufit VS OpenCL-Wrapper

There's GPUFit, but it doesn't seem as easy an flexible, and it looks like I'll have to write all my own fitting models and then recompile, which, I'll do it if I have to, but I really prefer the flexibility that lmfit provides.

In case you go with OpenCL, start here: https://github.com/ProjectPhysX/OpenCL-Wrapper

I've also open-sourced an OpenCL-Wrapper to eliminate all of the boilerplate code that otherwise comes with the OpenCL C++ bindings and lower the entry barrier. Especially for larger projects, the biolerplate code becomes really offputting, and I solved it entirely.

Somewhat unusual these days, but I mainly use OpenCL C. It's seems cumbersome and hard to learn at first, but becomes much more easy to use with the right tools. Once you master it, it whipes the floor with CPU programming; it's not unusual to see 100x speedup on a GPU compared to multithreaded CPU code at the same energy consumption. It's just as fast as CUDA - as efficient as the microarchitecture allows - but compatible with literally all GPU/CPU hardware of the last decade. No need to waste time on code porting if the next supercomputer has GPUs from a different vendor, it just runs out-of-the-box. Ideal for scientific compute!

I added this to my OpenCL-Wrapper in this commit, so anything built on top of it, such as FluidX3D, works on Arc out-of-the-box. Additionally, I fixed Intel's wrong VRAM capacity reporting on Arc in this patch.

Try OpenCL. You only need to implement the code once (in a vectorized form) and it works cross-platform on all GPUs and all CPUs, even on FPGAs. Performance is exactly as good as CUDA. There is still no rivaling framework today, although SYCL is starting to become a viable alternative.

I have found that OpenCL-Wrapper from PhysX has a great solution to this : https://github.com/ProjectPhysX/OpenCL-Wrapper/