3 ms·
> they made available a platform which for its entire lifespan up until that point, hadn't evolved under the same pressures as the existing x86 CPU market, but
by hamandcheese 3y ago
> they made available a platform which for its entire lifespan up until that point, hadn't evolved under the same pressures as the existing x86 CPU market, but instead in an environment in which there was really no natural motive for them to lock things down at the CPU level.
What is the natural motivation for x86 manufactures to lock their CPUs down?
- smolder 3y agoThere are several motivations for locking down x86. One of the biggest ones was DRM, the protected audio video path. The management engine on Intel also hosts TPM functionality, does some stuff with temperature sensing and fan control, and allows for some remote management. Those are all functions that Intel doesn't want end users or their installed software to be able to tamper with.
- chasil 3y agoThe "management engine" is a separate low-power CPU that is able to receive commands when the main power is off. This is used for off-hours patching and provisioning of corporate fleets. The CPU had previously been an ARC RISC core, but converted to an 80486 a few generations ago. The ME has had some showstopper bugs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine
- smolder 3y agoYes, all that is true, and AMD has their PSP. ME and PSP represent the "locked-down" part of the x86 platform, running binary blobs that only the CPU makers have the capability to modify (in the absense of exploits.) Not unlike the binary blobs that led Raptor to use an alternative to IBM POWER10.