3 ms·
(playing devil's advocate here, to be clear) What leads you to believe that Intel has any reason to think that there's an issue that needs changed? Or that "t
by jlgaddis 9y ago
(playing devil's advocate here, to be clear)
What leads you to believe that Intel has any reason to think that there's an issue that needs changed? Or that "the community" knows anything about their business processes or what Intel should do? They have their highly-paid C-levels to figure that out.
From their perspective, there's no problem. Nothing needs fixin'. You'll keep buying their CPUs, anyways -- you don't really have much of a choice, do you? [0]
Just go install those updates from your vendor(s) and go about your business, you'll be fine. No big deal, nothing to worry about. Carry on. Just like you did with that recent little ME/AMT issue. There'll be another issue to deal with in a few days and everyone will forget all about this one.
[0]: Oh, you're gonna replace all your infrastructure with AMD's CPUs, huh? Yeah, sure you are. They're no different.
- vbezhenar 9y agoBasically buying new Intel processor to replace old will yield 5-60% performance in I/O-heavy workloads even without any other changes but fixed processor bug, unless you're ready to tweak with your OS settings and fine with potential vulnerability. With proper marketing they can make huge profits from this situation. Sure, you can buy AMD, but Intel is still faster for many benchmarks. Given that they knew about bug for 7 months, I think that soon new processors will be without Meltdown bug.
- mindentropy 9y agoYou are right in your assessment. This is how it will go down. The vendors simply need Intel. There is now way they will make enemies with them. The problems are simply passed on to the customers who have no other option but accept the reduced performance.