3 ms·
Intel badly needed good competition, because they grew arrogant, lazy and stopped evolving (ECC, PCIE 4, more PCI lanes anybody?). What they got is even better,
by saiya-jin 7y ago
Intel badly needed good competition, because they grew arrogant, lazy and stopped evolving (ECC, PCIE 4, more PCI lanes anybody?). What they got is even better, and they are OK with admitting current superiority of AMD on desktops in most use cases.
Is the situation still bad with Intel regarding side-channel attacks? The fixes for those used to drop performance for up to 30%, which render them pathetic compared to AMD which doesn't suffer from those issues. This is real performance, not some synthetic benchmarks.
- paulmd 7y agoCascade Lake-X has a new set of hardware mitigations for side-channel attacks (including some which are not hardware-mitigated on AMD architectures, specifically Spectre v2 - AMD claims they are "difficult to exploit" but still enables software mitigations). Regardless, Firestrike Physics is not a benchmark that is substantially affected by mitigations. End-user tasks in general are not affected very strongly, generally ~1-3%, up to 5% in some cases. Phoronix tested across a spectrum of workstation tasks (not gaming) and found a geomean of about 12% performance impact for Intel and 4.5% for AMD. Linked earlier, here again: https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3900x-9900k-mitigations&num=8 https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=3900x-99... Generally, server tasks are hit hardest because they involve lots of context switching. Gaming is typically not affected much at all. Workstation tasks fall somewhere in the middle.