It would certainly be a large undertaking to perform these tests properly. And samples of hardware from a number of processor generations, maybe even stretching back 10 years or so. Of course, I'd also like to see tests with combinations of BIOS updates and OS/driver updates both enabled and disabled. There might be optimizations or further adjustments following the initial patches.
Cyndicate slimey move software#
To be honest, I can't believe that Intel thought that checking the security at the end instead of upfront was a good idea.Ģ0593455 said:So are tech sites going to be publishing extensive benchmarks across Intel and AMD systems past and present to see who is ultimately the most affected post-patch? They've been awfully quiet so far (absolutely nothing on AnandTech or Tom's), although I guess the sheer number of systems that needed to be (gotten hold of and) tested to get a good understanding of which CPUs are most affected by the Spectre/Meltdown patches is quite an undertaking.I would definitely like to see that, but it's probably better to wait a bit to make sure all the test hardware and software is patched, and that things have had a bit of time to settle. Spectre is a new technique that utilizes timing information to put together a picture of other code, if I understand it correctly. Meltdown really comes down to not checking security before you do a calculation. What IS slimy is Intel always lumping all three variants (2 Spectre and 1 Meltdown) together. They are issue microcode updates just to be certain. It has only changed in that they say they may be vulnerable to variant 2, but that it is extremely difficult for someone to exploit due to their architecture. They have said they were vulnerable to variant 1 of Spectre since the beginning, but that they was a very low chance of being vulnerable to Variant 2 due to their architecture. They are not vulnerable to the Meltdown at all, which is the easiest to exploit. Slimey move AMDAMD Has been saying they were less vulnerable almost from the beginning.
:)īut buying Ryzen isn't a bad idea, hop on the AM4 bandwagon.Ģ0588080 said:LIARS!!!!!!!! Defend them all you want they claimed immunity from these bugs to make their competition look worse. You can also just ignore and not test for minimum framerates, 0.1% lows etc and pretend there's nothing to see here. The good news is that CPUs have been overpowered for a long time, so the loss isn't going to do anything but butthurt those who live life as benchmark queens. Given that minimum frames are the most important aspect for gamers (only as good as the worst performance), this is huge. Expect games that stream textures to get absolutely hammered on minimum framerates.
Be interesting to see how this all pans out once the dust settles in a few months, but don't expect the above results to be the end of the performance hit on your Intel rigs. That's gaming, the main "concern" for most kids on sites like this.
Cyndicate slimey move Patch#
Patch tracking, not even fully patched yet: They don't want to anger their masters at Intel by pumping this up. The performance impact for Intel is huge, and it's understated in the press. Spectre needs protected against, but the big flaw (Meltdown) is not an issue. Not the case with servers.ĪMD is in an enviable position and someone deserves a raise there for their architectural choices. Your phone is a non-issue, it's patched and you move on. They run a lot of varied software, it's the wild west. Intel is in the vast majority of the world's datacenters, and the majority of desktops. That's why #IntelMeltdown is the meme even in the press. People are focusing on Intel because they're the only player that really matters.
0 kommentar(er)
