leftsalsa.blogg.se

1. #Intel fails out to spectre meltdown install#
2. #Intel fails out to spectre meltdown upgrade#
3. #Intel fails out to spectre meltdown windows 10#
4. #Intel fails out to spectre meltdown software#

Please check back here regularly for updates and new FAQs.

#Intel fails out to spectre meltdown install#

So the only way to avoid them (but why would you want to?), is essentially to never install another patch on Windows.Note: This article will be updated as additional information becomes available. It's clear what I'm after - every ounce of performance I can scrape out of the system.Īnd Correct me if I'm wrong - the patches are part of the cumulative updates.

#Intel fails out to spectre meltdown upgrade#

I just spent more $3000 upgrading my PC to a I9-7900 (~ $1900 AUD counting delidding), and $750 for a top end motherboard + an upgrade of my 950 pro 512 to a 960 Pro 1TB and a new 280mm cooler with Noctua NF-A14 PWM iPPC fans to keep it all cool.

#Intel fails out to spectre meltdown windows 10#

I'm surprised we haven't seen the tin foil hat group start saying this is another Microsoft/Intel collusion to force sales of Intel upgrades and Windows 10 (Though I wonder how the exploits here are going to help Intel's sales at all). Upgrade to Windows 10, as Windows <10 are being hit harder. That cost of that across the board has got to be nothing short of phenomenal!Īnd the message seems to be clear. Pushing us back essentially two generations or down several models of CPUs. Then to have this come along and suck the very life out of our CPUs. Who buys a 6700K or 8700K when an 6400 / 8350 will for most games suffice? People bought the higher end CPUs to get performance out of them. I agree that the most serious performance issue is going to be faced by cloud providers & appliance vendors that suddenly need to add more capacity, but I think your views on security are out of step with the times.Įven if the performance hit were only two percent it's still unacceptable! Sorry to be tough, but you're new and your points read like they're straight from a script out of Intel's PR. Effective security depends on a layered approach, and without patching these vulnerabilities, it might be possible for someone to combine them with a vulnerability in a web browser to gain admin privileges. I doubt anyone who's ever been infected with malware would agree that known vulnerabilities should go unpatched. Nothing to do with spectre and meltdown.That's an interesting philosophy on security. We have already seen so many exploits and company servers being hacked to reveal customer data and even CC data.

#Intel fails out to spectre meltdown software#

Software issues are a far bigger concern than this.

Microsoft, which was among those downplaying the issue before, said that they had recorded significant performance impacts on Windows 7.Ģ0586183 said:I feel that even if end users don't patch, it doesn't really matters. Epic Games said the patches were responsible for a huge performance hit on its cloud service provider, which caused instability in servers for Fortnite.

As the issue entered its second week and patches had been rolled out to more customers, however, a different picture was appearing. Many were skeptical, naturally, and believed that Intel and its affected enterprise customers were downplaying the issue. Intel’s official stance continued to be that home users would face little impact, while the effect on enterprise would be “highly workload-dependent.” Many independent tests, including our own, also didn’t find any major concerns. The immediate follow up from major involved parties seemed to be mild, however. Right from the get-go, it was known that the fixes for it had the potential for a significant performance impact. The Meltdown/Spectre vulnerabilities have been much more than just a blemish on Intel’s reputation.