• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Massive security hole in CPU's incoming?Official Meltdown/Spectre Discussion Thread

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Ouch... This is far worse than I expected... Is making the processor performance goes to even before the Sandy Bridge era....
 
I bet someone at the NSA is going
"DOH! we got caught trying to be big brother Trump... lets pretend like we dont know anything."

:X

but on another note...

If we do get a performance hit that big, Intel better be doing recalls... the chip is no good, infact its worse then last gen, and would make no sense to keep it over last gen.
 
aigomorla said:
I bet someone at the NSA is going
"DOH! we got caught trying to be big brother Trump... lets pretend like we dont know anything."

:X

but on another note...

If we do get a performance hit that big, Intel better be doing recalls... the chip is no good, infact its worse then last gen, and would make no sense to keep it over last gen.
Click to expand...

Yeah if this is true Epyc sales and market share really are going to be Epyc.
 
Several months ago I think there was a rumor was Intel managers were telling validation teams to hurry up. It's ridiculous because validation can't be sped up. Errors are caught over time, not at your will.

If that was true, then they would be paying the price for it. This bug, the minor bug Skylake-SP has(LSD), Atom C2000, Puma series modems, I woudn't be surprised if they were ALL affected by it. How unfortunate.
 
IntelUser2000 said:
Several months ago I think there was a rumor was Intel managers were telling validation teams to hurry up. It's ridiculous because validation can't be sped up. Errors are caught over time, not at your will.

If that was true, then they would be paying the price for it. This bug, the minor bug Skylake-SP has(LSD), Atom C2000, Puma series modems, I woudn't be surprised if they were ALL affected by it. How unfortunate.
Click to expand...

you mean this? https://danluu.com/cpu-bugs/
 
Um....those are massive performance hits. We're not talking 1% here. Intel should recall every single CPU impacted if this is the case.
 
StinkyPinky said:
Um....those are massive performance hits. We're not talking 1% here. Intel should recall every single CPU impacted if this is the case.
Click to expand...
Lol, you're talking about probably 85% of computers sold in the last 8 years. That's hundreds of millions of computers. No recall is happening.
 
I remember when Linux had to re-write their page-table / -fault handling, when Intel came out with their Core2 line-up, because it further defined the behavior of how that all works, more specifically, than P4 and earlier, in which case "looser" code worked.
 
Clearly I'm talking about a recall under warranty. It's a faulty product, and in many countries that is a breach of warranty. Intel would be facing massive fines.
 
I fear that if we made recall/replacement mandatory standard (which might not be possible with older CPUs or logic issues that can't be fixed just with some respin), it would make the business way too risky for the vendors.

Errata are not something you can completely rule out, they just happen, these chips are way too complex. Something like this can always happen and it would be unfortunate if a really massive recall actually killed essentially irreplaceable companies (it's mostly luck - probably - that it happened to Intel and not AMD, or VIA).

AMD TLB bug in Barcelona B2 didn't result in a recall either (although it was smaller in extent and not directly a security issue).

Justinbaileyman said:
Newly released current Gen Coffee Lake is not effected by this bug correct?
Click to expand...
Its architecture is old, I'd expect it is affected, Cannon Lake possibly too. If it was already fixed in it, that would likely mean Intel knew about the issue but didn't inform public/users to keep selling stuff.
 
Well I just got my Rig on launch day and just cant afford a complete overhaul to switch back to AMD Ryzen. Guess I will just have to sit through BS this time around. I am hoping Video Encoding and Gaming isn't hit to hard with this bug.
 
Dayman1225 said:
It may be "old" but Intel has been fixing errata in the Skylake Core, from Skylake S through Coffee Lake S
Click to expand...
True, Kaby and Coffee are basically newer revisions of Skylake core. Anyway Coffee retail chips are being produced since mid summer, so I doubt are not affected. And even if not then I dont understand the post above with benchmarks where is clearly performance hit on the Coffee Lake chips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top