5 ms·

I just got an 8700k last week. I was thinking about returning it and go with Amd instead. The truth is, I do not do many tasks on my home computer where the CPU

I just got an 8700k last week. I was thinking about returning it and go with Amd instead. The truth is, I do not do many tasks on my home computer where the CPU is going to be at >50% at all times. The other truth is, that Intel CPUs are just faster than Amd Cpus (now with a few exceptions, but for general use that still applies). I'd say if you are talking about a large quantity purchase, you should maybe wait or look for alternatives. Other than that it should not make much difference for us "normal folks." Another truth is that there is / was so much misinformation out there. Finally, I wonder if there are going to be any optimizations to these fixes in the future?

danieldk 9y ago
The cynic in me is amazed how people complain about a loss of 0-30% in performance on the desktop (depending on the workload), but are completely happy to replace native applications by Electron applications and/or web applications. Of course, these may be disjoint sets of people. I think when it comes to most desktop workloads, the security issues are far more interesting and serious. And while Meltdown only affects Intel CPUs, Spectre affects all (?) out-of-order CPUs and there may be more/more effictive attacks in the future. So every fast, modern CPU is pretty much in the same boat and it will take some time for the dust to settle. So, I would just stick with the Intel CPU. You can vote with your wallet once one vendor decides to axe ME/PSP and/or properly mitigates Spectre-type attacks ;).
- chrisper 9y ago
  The problem, I think, is a psychological one. No one likes to get stuff taken away. People were also annoyed how "bad" their VW drives after the diesel fixes. Even if you probably never hit the limits to feel the difference, just the thought that from now on your CPU could be slower than it was yesterday is annoying enough. But I agree with you. It is the wrong crowd that complains the loudest!
- kazinator 9y ago
  If your CPU takes a performance hit, it will affect everything, including the non-native applications.
- usernam 9y ago
  As a developer, I'm not so sure about that: I don't use any web and non-native program by choice. In fact, I'm even stricter than that, I can tell you at a distance if a program was written using QML instead of QtWidgets (due to lag and poor behavior) and avoid the first just as I avoid non-native apps. In fact, unless I'm restricted to a single program I don't have any alternatives to, I'll generally even select programs written in a language I understand and/or prefer. I have several colleagues that use slightly different metrics, but still pay very close attention to performance and details of the tools they use. Especially if that's something they use for hours over the course of a day.
- anarazel 9y ago
  > The cynic in me is amazed how people complain about a loss of 0-30% in performance on the desktop (depending on the workload), but are completely happy to replace native applications by Electron applications and/or web applications. Of course, these may be disjoint sets of people I think this largely due to faulty bottleneck analysis. I'm not hugely slowed down overall if the switch to a chat application is 50ms slower, even if I may notice it. If the tests I need to run at various stages of the development process are slowed down by 30% however, that might actually be noticeable for development pace. More likely to context switch to something else / get out of flow.
  - danieldk 9y ago
    Thank you for this comment, it is very insightful. It's also interesting how perception of these bottlenecks differs. I wouldn't care much if tests are running 30% slower, I run them in the background from my editor anyway. I usually tidy up stuff in the meanwhile or git stage some lines (which needs to be done anyway). However, if an editor has a higher latency than I am used to, it drives me crazy.
    - anarazel 9y ago
      > It's also interesting how perception of these bottlenecks differs. I wouldn't care much if tests are running 30% slower, I run them in the background from my editor anyway. I usually tidy up stuff in the meanwhile or git stage some lines (which needs to be done anyway). Heh. I do that too, but I'm anxious enough that I rerun tests after finalizing the commit. I'll still use the time for the tests to finish to do another read through the commit, but especially when pushing to many supported branches at the same time, tests still take longer (work on a pg, which has 5 years of supported back branches...). > However, if an editor has a higher latency than I am used to, it drives me crazy. Oh yea, but I wouldn't use a web based editor, ever ;). The point I was trying to make was less about something as central as an editor - where I spent a lot of my time, fighting for first place besides terminals - but more around secondary non-critical path stuff like IM.
JohnJamesRambo 9y ago
But why did you get a new CPU if you don't need horsepower? Not saying this is you, but I don't understand people that have to have the fastest processor but then rationalize away these losses in power with "I don't use my CPU much anyway."
- chrisper 9y ago
  That is not what I meant. My new CPU is much faster than the old one. I was hitting the limits at certain times. And now that I finally can afford upgrading, I did. But this was all before we knew about Meltdown / Spectre... Of course I am annoyed by the fact that I will lose some power. But I do not have much of a choice now, do I? Either way, I am not utilizing my CPU the way servers with many users do. These servers will feel this impact the most. I personally don't care if I lose 2 fps or if my compilation will take 20 seconds longer after all these fixes. But if you budget let's say 5000 USD per month for servers and everything was running fine and now it turns out you need to add an additional 3000 USD a month, then that's where the impact is felt the most and not with normal users like us where the compilation time might take a bit longer. Also, for some people it is just a hobby to always have the latest and best :)

danieldk 9y ago

The cynic in me is amazed how people complain about a loss of 0-30% in performance on the desktop (depending on the workload), but are completely happy to replace native applications by Electron applications and/or web applications. Of course, these may be disjoint sets of people. I think when it comes to most desktop workloads, the security issues are far more interesting and serious. And while Meltdown only affects Intel CPUs, Spectre affects all (?) out-of-order CPUs and there may be more/more effictive attacks in the future. So every fast, modern CPU is pretty much in the same boat and it will take some time for the dust to settle. So, I would just stick with the Intel CPU. You can vote with your wallet once one vendor decides to axe ME/PSP and/or properly mitigates Spectre-type attacks ;).

chrisper 9y ago
The problem, I think, is a psychological one. No one likes to get stuff taken away. People were also annoyed how "bad" their VW drives after the diesel fixes. Even if you probably never hit the limits to feel the difference, just the thought that from now on your CPU could be slower than it was yesterday is annoying enough. But I agree with you. It is the wrong crowd that complains the loudest!
kazinator 9y ago
If your CPU takes a performance hit, it will affect everything, including the non-native applications.
usernam 9y ago
As a developer, I'm not so sure about that: I don't use any web and non-native program by choice. In fact, I'm even stricter than that, I can tell you at a distance if a program was written using QML instead of QtWidgets (due to lag and poor behavior) and avoid the first just as I avoid non-native apps. In fact, unless I'm restricted to a single program I don't have any alternatives to, I'll generally even select programs written in a language I understand and/or prefer. I have several colleagues that use slightly different metrics, but still pay very close attention to performance and details of the tools they use. Especially if that's something they use for hours over the course of a day.
anarazel 9y ago
> The cynic in me is amazed how people complain about a loss of 0-30% in performance on the desktop (depending on the workload), but are completely happy to replace native applications by Electron applications and/or web applications. Of course, these may be disjoint sets of people I think this largely due to faulty bottleneck analysis. I'm not hugely slowed down overall if the switch to a chat application is 50ms slower, even if I may notice it. If the tests I need to run at various stages of the development process are slowed down by 30% however, that might actually be noticeable for development pace. More likely to context switch to something else / get out of flow.
- danieldk 9y ago
  Thank you for this comment, it is very insightful. It's also interesting how perception of these bottlenecks differs. I wouldn't care much if tests are running 30% slower, I run them in the background from my editor anyway. I usually tidy up stuff in the meanwhile or git stage some lines (which needs to be done anyway). However, if an editor has a higher latency than I am used to, it drives me crazy.
  - anarazel 9y ago
    > It's also interesting how perception of these bottlenecks differs. I wouldn't care much if tests are running 30% slower, I run them in the background from my editor anyway. I usually tidy up stuff in the meanwhile or git stage some lines (which needs to be done anyway). Heh. I do that too, but I'm anxious enough that I rerun tests after finalizing the commit. I'll still use the time for the tests to finish to do another read through the commit, but especially when pushing to many supported branches at the same time, tests still take longer (work on a pg, which has 5 years of supported back branches...). > However, if an editor has a higher latency than I am used to, it drives me crazy. Oh yea, but I wouldn't use a web based editor, ever ;). The point I was trying to make was less about something as central as an editor - where I spent a lot of my time, fighting for first place besides terminals - but more around secondary non-critical path stuff like IM.

JohnJamesRambo 9y ago

But why did you get a new CPU if you don't need horsepower? Not saying this is you, but I don't understand people that have to have the fastest processor but then rationalize away these losses in power with "I don't use my CPU much anyway."

chrisper 9y ago
That is not what I meant. My new CPU is much faster than the old one. I was hitting the limits at certain times. And now that I finally can afford upgrading, I did. But this was all before we knew about Meltdown / Spectre... Of course I am annoyed by the fact that I will lose some power. But I do not have much of a choice now, do I? Either way, I am not utilizing my CPU the way servers with many users do. These servers will feel this impact the most. I personally don't care if I lose 2 fps or if my compilation will take 20 seconds longer after all these fixes. But if you budget let's say 5000 USD per month for servers and everything was running fine and now it turns out you need to add an additional 3000 USD a month, then that's where the impact is felt the most and not with normal users like us where the compilation time might take a bit longer. Also, for some people it is just a hobby to always have the latest and best :)