The intel shitstorm is fucking nothing

The intel shitstorm is fucking nothing.

Hardware unboxed did tests on an 8700k pre and post windows update, basically no difference.

youtube.com/watch?v=_qZksorJAuY

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=avZDnKz4V98
courses.engr.illinois.edu/cs241/sp2009/Lectures/04-syscalls.pdf
pcworld.com/article/3245606/security/intel-x86-cpu-kernel-bug-faq-how-it-affects-pc-mac.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It's okay, your intel is still faster in games :)

NO

NOTHING IS HAPPENING TO YOUR VIDEO GAMES PEOPLE

THIS IS NOW ABOUT VIDEO GAMES

EVERYONE BACK TO YOUR CAVES YOU FILTH

Threadripper still my waifu as always.
Wonder if we will get a ryzen+ version of the 1950x that easily gets past 4ghz.

Just nerds on here going autistic

>as long as my video fagames and anime encodes aren't affected there's no problem :)

Back to your containment board, shitstain.

Great, now all the vidya kiddies can go back to Sup Forums and the rest of us can discuss this properly, thanks.

how is this even fixable with a patch? i thought the exploit meant people could bypass all software

>discuss this properly
OH NO NO NO.... HAAAHAAHAHHAHAHAA

I kid you not. better discussion about this on Sup Forums with less shilling. The absolute state of Sup Forums

Bu-But 2018 is supposed to be Year of AMD

He tested it across workstation/gaming workloads plus read write tests.

Maybe you're too fucking stupid to see how the effect on consumer/workstation users is important you fucking idiot

It "fixes" it by completely disabling the vulnerable function.

Wrong.

>Skylake and beyond doesn't have much of a performance issue
Notice how Google mentioned Haswell...

Intel mitigated this years ago but didn't tell anyone.

>I kid you not. better discussion about this on Sup Forums with less shilling. The absolute state of Sup Forums
Yeah, I went there too to check it out. Complete bunch of clueless retards who had no idea what was going on, asking if their CPU was affected by posting pictures of their laptop's hardware stickers.
Great discussion there, faglord.

what is he wrong about? if you know the correct answer, then it would be appreciated if you said what it is

>Sup Forums
>clueless retards

IMAGINE MY SHOCK

Modern Sup Forums is indistinguishable from /r/AMD. How did this happen?

ATM there's retards on Sup Forums shilling for vega because they claim nvidia is affected too. Fuck this board.

They come here to shitpost because they can't post niggers and jews on plebbit.

Profit margins in the consumer market are much thinner than the datacenter market. Intel isn't worried about you faggots with your gayms, they're worried about losing B2B sales.

...

does Threadripper make Blender Cycles look like Blender Render?

>muh muh datacenter
>implying anyone on Sup Forums is running a cloud service
thank you based intel, eat shit amdtards with your poozen garbage.

How do you know what /r/AMD is like? Stay there, you're part of the problem.

Really makes you think

am I safe Sup Forums?

Oh wow, this GPU-intensive benchmark wasn't affected by the CPU patch. What a nothingburger!

>It's a screen cap episode.
Can I have proof from a professional.

Gee maybe because it turned out that every intel chip since the fucking pentium pro has a gaping hardware level security flaw, and then the kikes tried to cover it up by revealing a different, unrelated security flaw in x86 architecture as a whole, which, apparently, they had been failing to disclose specifically for this purpose.

DELET

It's polite to at least visit a place before you start shittalking it. Or do you just jump onto bandwagons rather than forming your own opinions based on your own experiences?

Cycles can run both on GPU and CPU. In this case it's obviously running on the CPU. It doesn't show a slowdown because rendering doesn't need a lot of context switches. It's fun to laugh at Intel but at least do it right instead of spouting bullshit which makes you sound retarded.

I simply do not care at all about other places.

yeah it's "nothing" and totally 'fine'. holy shit when did Sup Forums turn into a bunch of retards that have no idea what they're talkign about go back to your dorito covered overwatch gamer chair stupid faggot aspie retard

Not the guy, but he is correct that you're incorrect.

What the patch does is force the CPU to reload the entire virtual memory map for the state when it switches between Ring 0 and Ring 3. In certain cases it also causes in a cache flush. The result is significant cache misses and also requires a bunch of cycles to swap between modes.

The costs of doing so are pretty significant and will affect anything that writes to the disk often, uses network heavily, is input dependent or uses significant virtual assets.

Also, OP is, as ever, a fag. That benchmark result is meaningless. There's a slight cost in CPU time when sending the data to be rendered for the first time, and then subsequent communications back and forward trigger the issue. Despite the light usage, you still see a ~3% drop off in performance, and this is basically a best case scenario for the chip.

...

>calls others retards
>can't write a coherent sentence

What did you mean by this? I'm serious, I have no idea what the fuck you're on about

the over-inflated public outcry and media fear-mongering about this Intel CPU exploit, along with Intel's apathetic response feels like deja vu to me and the Intel Pentium FDIV bug of 1994.

NOOOOO!!!!!! FUCKKKKKK

This was never about videogames.

...

I am not saying it's the end of the world I was referring to the exploit itself being a significant discovery.

> Can't read a coherent sentence
hi OP

...

Err, not sure you replied to the right person.

>OH NO NO NO.... HAAAHAAHAHHAHAHAA
Is this some kind of Sup Forums meme? Because this shit looks ridiculous. Go back to your proto-reddit of a board. You must be 18+ to post here.

youtube.com/watch?v=avZDnKz4V98

oh btw if you have intel cpu made before 2011-ish (ones without botnet) you are also vulnerable to universal root access by design

enjoy

[YouTube] The Memory Sinkhole - Unleashing An X86 Design Flaw Allowing Universal Privilege Escalation

remember to thank intel

>0.7 difference
>"basically no difference"
I'll never see those 0.7 again.

> feels like deja vu to me and the Intel Pentium FDIV bug of 1994.

Which resulted in recalling all affected units. That would be beyond my wettest of dreams.

>tfw you didn't fall for the haswell trap

>grabbing at straws
LOL

Amd shills have been proven time after time to be dumb as fuck about everything

It hits hard on anything running VMs. RIP Intel VM emulation.

All those sweet AWS.

>yes goy you're safe of course
>why would you not believe me?

It isn't important, at all, relative to the server space, where it's a complete catastrophe. You keep running that damage control though for free though, pisspot. It's not going to help Intel's share price one bit, or Brian avoid his insider trading lawsuit.

>over-inflated
Not really drama when a defective processor can steal your money when a bank is calculating fees. This bug here is a scandal because it is a rookie mistake.

>swearing allegiance to a website

*tips*

Damn, so this is the power of Sup Forums.

6700k

>people are REEEEing and shilling gaymd this hard

How do we know you're not an intelshill who faked that image?

>its fucking nothing

gee i wonder why he didnt do anything that was close to be heavy I/O

He didn't..

That benchmark doesn't require kernel access. Thus the benchmarks aren't going to encounter the slow down. It's simply a cherry picked benchmark.

Run Crystalmark for me, see what happens.

Also, I don't believe Microsoft have pushed their patch yet, have they?

Had I known that I would've ran it prior to patching.

Microsoft has it available up on their website

Fair enough to both parts.

Trust me, this will affect everyone with an Intel chip. The only question is how much, and it's going to be far more significant than a few points.

Databases will see 30%+ reduction.
Some games might see 2%, some might see 10%, just depends
Browsing the web will likely see 4% or so.

Really depends on the workload and how efficiently it's been coded. A lot of work arounds can be implemented to limit the impact, but there's definitely a cost to be paid.

>I/O
Hey its the retard who thinks IO means syscall

>Buy multiple cheap Core 2 Duos from aliexpress
>wait
>Claim your 20USD per CPU from a class action lawsuit against intel.

Or is this considered fraud?

>AMDrones massively overhype and overreact
>nothing happens anyway and people will still buy Coffee Lakes
>the people who never bought Coffee Lake will buy the 8-core Coffee Lake-S
>AMDrones will continue to use this bug as a talking point

IO requires a syscall you twatsicle.

No, but you'd have to prove you bought them before the issue came to light. Basically 0 chance you'll get it.

I disagree that they're overhyping.
I agree with the rest of it, except you don't know what Coffee Lake-S is.

Coffee Lake-S has been leaked months ago

It's the Z390 8-core chip

Yes, Z390 and not Z370

Gotta fork dem shekels for a new motherboard

At least Cannon Lake-X uses the same shit as Skylake-X

b-but I run owncloud on my xeon box

No syscall requires and IO you dumbshit.

So I went to the Microsoft catalog and downloaded the Win7 update, but my computer is not saying there's no update to install?

But this doesn't have the firmware patch yet, only the OS protections which aren't gonna do much damage for the performance, just isolate some calls.

CAD user here

should I swItch for AMD?

I liked ATI a lot if this can interest you

>workloads that don't require context switching are not affected
Who would've thought.

Yeah, that's not right. You're talking about Coffee Lake Refresh

The 8700K is a Coffee Lake S chip. S denotes Intels desktop chips. T for AIO, U/Y/H/HK/HX for laptops, and X and E for extreme. Minor point, but Just poking at it. To be fair, they change it ALL THE FUCKING TIME..

courses.engr.illinois.edu/cs241/sp2009/Lectures/04-syscalls.pdf

Computer science 101 you uneducated swine. I mean for fucks sake, I'm a network security guy and I knew that. Get the fuck out.

Only Intel canned Coffee LakeX entirely, so I don't know how people would "still buy it". Weird, isn't it?

>Non syscall heavy operations are unnafected

We already know that dumbass

Imagine being so completely fucking retarded that you actually thing some youtube imbeciles are in any way trustworthy and competent to do hardware bechmarks

/thread

dishonest shill video games are mainly GPU
the biggest concern are servers

What about virtual box?

It's a VM.. So by the transient property..

>Databases will see 30%+ reduction.
>Some games might see 2%, some might see 10%, just depends
>Browsing the web will likely see 4% or so.
Where did you get these figures?

You should literally wait a week and look at the new benchmarks.

Well, testing on databases has already been done. There are a bunch of numbers floating about and 30% has been the baseline so far, with some instances seeing much much worse depending on all kinds of things. My personal testing was 27% on my JIRA server.

The second is clearly a "we might see" comment. Just need to wait and see because MS haven't pushed their patch yet. The patch referenced doesn't addresses the address tables, so it hasn't been tested. The linux numbers are legit pointless. The bottleneck is the GPU driver, not the CPU, so it isn't as apparent in these tests. Also all the linux tests I've seen so far are with AMD GPUs with draw call dispatchers on GPU which reduces overhead.. Wait and see..

Web browsing was an extrapolation from my understanding of the way browsers interact with systems. Could be better or worse.

All of it is just theoretical, because literally EVERY system will react differently.

The difference between a 3xxx and 6xxx chip with the patch is statistically significant. Generationally there have been huge changes to the operation of cache and memory systems that haven't always appeared to the end user that will make a huge difference in these cases. Older chips are (mostly) going to get punished WAY harder by the patch than newer chips.

I'm sure TomsHardware or whoever will do a piece on this that will be worth reading, but for now, anecdotal as fuck.

>hardware unboxed
good goyim

>I'm sure TomsHardware or whoever will do a piece on this that will be worth reading, but for now, anecdotal as fuck.
>Toms Hardware

You're not wrong, but they have a really good habit of going back into historical testing.

They're Intel orientated without a doubt, but equally, they've had cause to be for a long time.

Pick your news source of choice. I spend a ton of time reading and rarely find TomsHardware to be outrageous. Only time was that "Best CPUs of 2017" article which was clearly based on bad math and wanting to play safe for their readers. Can't blame them for the latter part of that.

>MUH GAMES GET SLOWER!!!!
>Sup Forums REEEEs
>games aren't affected after all but servers get fucked
>"lol it's nothing because MUH GAME works!!!!"

>Well, testing on databases has already been done. There are a bunch of numbers floating about and 30% has been the baseline so far,
That's what I'm asking for, the source on this. If you can post your specs and methodology for running your benchmark that would be helpful, too.

you numbnuts, you have to enable the update after install for it to work.

Fucking windows terminal output is going to get even slower. RIP...

theregister.co.uk

Can you post the rest of the link?

what's wrong with haswell?

Sup Forums is dumb what else is new

its shit
t. haswell user

From PC world article.

pcworld.com/article/3245606/security/intel-x86-cpu-kernel-bug-faq-how-it-affects-pc-mac.html

>More recent Intel processors from the Haswell (4th-gen) era onward have a technology called PCID (Process-Context Identifiers) enabled and are said to suffer less of a performance hit. Plus, some applications—most notably virtualization tasks and data center/cloud workloads—are affected more than others. Intel confirmed that the performance loss will be dependent on workload, and “should not be significant” for average home computer users.