• 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.

[TheReg] Intel Management Engine: Is this why we have seen slower speed growth?

ehume

ehume

Golden Member
Here. With the ME running under the OS, it has to be slowing the OS down. Maybe the growth in performance has gone partly to this.

Edit: thanks to zir blazer for this introduction to the IME
 
Last edited:
So... in order to please the government of US and Israel, they screw up the improvement of the processors? Seems interesting.
 
SarahKerrigan said:
You realize the ME is a separate processor, right? And one with a negligible amount of die space at that?
Click to expand...
According to the presentation, it interposes between the CPU and every operation. There has to be a slowing because of that detour. Ain't nothin free. My speculation is that we have seen less improvement than we expect in the last several generations. This may be the culprit. I'm willing to be educated.
 
It's not tough to make the intuitive leap to realizing a system designed to help sysadmins with out-of-band management could become something that can potentially be used for malicious purposes. But I think the performance hit would be negligible, and anyway far from the main concern.
 
Anyone who thinks Intel is purposely slowing CPU performance gains is free to design a faster CPU and rake in all those billions and billions in profit.* Modern CPU design is hard, and doubly so when backwards compatibility is required.


*Beyond the obvious like different clocks and core counts.
 
Jovec said:
Anyone who thinks Intel is purposely slowing CPU performance gains is free to design a faster CPU and rake in all those billions and billions in profit.* Modern CPU design is hard, and doubly so when backwards compatibility is required.


*Beyond the obvious like different clocks and core counts.
Click to expand...

This.
 
Jovec said:
Anyone who thinks Intel is purposely slowing CPU performance gains is free to design a faster CPU and rake in all those billions and billions in profit.
Click to expand...

Barriers to entry.

Intel knows this and is making use of it to maximize profit. Their primary interest is just that, maximizing profit. This does not necessarily mean maximizing performance improvement per year. Especially in a monopoly-like environment.
 
Fjodor2001 said:
Barriers to entry.

Intel knows this and is making use of it to maximize profit. Their primary interest is just that, maximizing profit. This does not necessarily mean maximizing performance improvement per year. Especially in a monopoly-like environment.
Click to expand...

There is a small underdog company that has no barriers to the entry and it seems that despite Intel slowing down they are not making much progress in shrinking the huge performance gap they have when compared to Intel. Maybe they are being bribed by Intel to not develop faster processors too.
 
No, I'm sure they have good reasons for making this device, but my hypothesis is that ME is why we haven't seen larger gains in processor capability.

It must be worth it to them to build this in. But if someone ever gets inside enough to hack it, will we on the outside even know when we have been hacked, much less fix it?
 
ehume said:
No, I'm sure they have good reasons for making this device, but my hypothesis is that ME is why we haven't seen larger gains in processor capability.

It must be worth it to them to build this in. But if someone ever gets inside enough to hack it, will we on the outside even know when we have been hacked, much less fix it?
Click to expand...
Ask the NSA.
 
ehume said:
No, I'm sure they have good reasons for making this device, but my hypothesis is that ME is why we haven't seen larger gains in processor capability.

It must be worth it to them to build this in. But if someone ever gets inside enough to hack it, will we on the outside even know when we have been hacked, much less fix it?
Click to expand...

But its still on the PCH and not the CPU. So what's next, not making faster chipsets due to the ME?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top