John this comment catches me by surprise.
I thought AMD was, has been, pushing for a future-is-fusion vision in which their CPU's will incorporate APU's?
Your statement implies that APU's and the vision behind their creation are not applicable in the workstation/server/HPC environments which is confusing to me as Nvidia has shown that these are the very environments where APU's have significant utility.
Perhaps that's because the APU part is just marketing and in fact all it is right now is a low end gpu stuck on chip. If AMD were serious about gpu compute in super computers they'd be doing their own project denver by combining an opteron with some gpu compute version of a radeon.
As for the GPUs, nvidia has ECC, we will have it soon, I am guessing that is the reason.
Well it's a reason. There's all the others like gpu architecture and software support. In particular providing a basic opencl driver won't cut it when the opposition has comprehensive sdk's, debuggers, C++ support, and all the rest of it. AMD previously has relied on others to produce the software - e.g. MS, but MS isn't really interested in DX compute right now - they are fully focused on windows 8 + arm + tablets. Hence this is a pretty huge stumbling block.
Imo AMD are hardly any more focused on compute then MS right now - they have basically let nvidia have the market, choosing to believe that they can just step in any time - all you need is an opencl driver and EEC support. Clearly there's a whole lot more to it then that, and nvidia have spent a lot of money developing it and are very unlikely to share.