tfjs VS gpuweb

TensorFlow.js

Many people seem to be unaware of tensorflow.js, an official JS implementation of TF

https://github.com/tensorflow/tfjs

I'd love to see PyTorch in JS, but I think unless you get it running on the GPU it won't be able to do much.

TensorflowJS GitHub Repository

Also, Tensorflow.js WebGPU backend has been in the works for quite some time: https://github.com/tensorflow/tfjs/tree/master/tfjs-backend-...

It's a pity that tfjs never truly developed any decent ops. E.g. you need lgamma to implement the cap for zero-inflated poisson regression and tfjs simply doesn't have that: https://github.com/tensorflow/tfjs/issues/2011

People have been doing it for long with WebGL, see eg https://github.com/tensorflow/tfjs and https://cloudblogs.microsoft.com/opensource/2021/09/02/onnx-...

thanks, no not unity, going to show it as a demo with threejs + tensorflow on the web. I found a github request to add face orientation https://github.com/tensorflow/tfjs/issues/3835 looks like they assigned someone to add it but doesn't look like its available yet, but there's some posts about the math I can use to get rotations based on some of the landmarks

There already exist a wide variety of neural network inference engines that run in web browsers (e.g. TensorFlow.js and, my personal favorite for use with PyTorch models, ONNX Runtime Web), but pre- and post-processing has always required imperative manipulations on flat buffers rather than a clean ndarray interface.

Full docs and code: https://github.com/tensorflow/tfjs/tree/master/e2e/benchmarks/local-benchmark

People keep spreading this incredibly misleading statement, and yours is even more misleading (suggesting Apple opposed a 'GPU WASM')

By all accounts, Apple's /only/ stance was that if WebGPU used SPIR-V it would be a non-starter for them, due to ongoing legal issues between Apple and Khronos.

Apple actually proposed WebHLSL in collaboration with Microsoft, to have HLSL be the standard.

Mozilla employee's stance[0] was that SPIRV was too low level, did not fit with the goals of WebGPU portability and security, and expressed concern that Khronos may add functionality to SPIRV they cannot support in WebGPU like raytracing instructions .. 'So we'd always be on the verge of forking SPIR-V in some way.'

It was also noted by many people that even if a bytecode format was used, it would still have to be translated to the target (HLSL/DXIL, MSL, etc.) in almost the same way a text format would.

Nobody proposed a 'GPU WASM equivalent' or an alternative bytecode format.

The hard truth is that shader compilation is a fucking nightmare, people do not realize how bad it is across the different native APIs. SPIR-V is good, but it doesn't solve that - and presents other challenges if you are a web browser API. Vulkan and SPIRV are not the golden goose many make them out to be.

[0] https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/issues/847#issuecomment-642...

Yes it is still a bit new. WebGPU is not finished and is still being worked on: https://webgpu.io/

WebGPU currently doesn't support the "bindless" resource access model (see: https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/issues/380).

The "max number of sampled texture per shader stage" is a runtime device limit, and the minimal value for that seems to be 16. So texture atlasses are still a thing in WebGPU.

There's even an implementation under discussion to have the dp4a instruction added to WebGPU (https://github.com/gpuweb/gpuweb/issues/2677)