Intel Chips' List of Security Flaws Grows (Updated)

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Contributor

Lucian Armasu is a Contributing Writer for Tom's Hardware US. He covers software news and the issues surrounding privacy and security.

  • leoscott
    Great. More slowdowns.
    Reply
  • SkyBill40
    21234284 said:
    Great. More slowdowns.

    You did see this line as the last sentence in the second to last paragraph, right?

    "Intel's own benchmarks showed that the performance impact of the patches is negligible."

    Reply
  • valeman2012
    21234333 said:
    21234284 said:
    Great. More slowdowns.

    You did see this line as the last sentence in the second to last paragraph, right?

    "Intel's own benchmarks showed that the performance impact of the patches is negligible."


    I seen these kind of Benchmarks from the Own companies, but we have try it yourself to see how many fps we lost.
    By the looks of these Endless Spectre bugs,,,lets say you security all spectre patched your Intel i5 7600K (stock) it will perfrom weaker than a i5 6600K (Unpatched)
    Reply
  • rantoc
    Great, spectre patches set back perfrmance about 1 year due to intels low performance gains with its low competition then IE it was in milking mode... what will happen this time when patched? Another year of performance loss equivalent when "patched"?

    Where is my refund?
    Reply
  • Dantte
    21234333 said:
    21234284 said:
    Great. More slowdowns.

    You did see this line as the last sentence in the second to last paragraph, right?

    "Intel's own benchmarks showed that the performance impact of the patches is negligible."


    "...negligible" is a relative term; negligible for you, or Intel, may not necessarily be negligible for leoscott, he may value a 1-FPS lost. Needless to say, there are "more slowdowns", these slowdowns are just "negligible" in the eyes of Intel.
    Reply
  • popatim
    I agree. Who knows what "Negligible" means to them. Did they test this on a 32 Core Xeon or an i5 ??? It's already like being down 1 core :(
    Reply
  • stdragon
    Speculative Execution - the gift that keeps on giving.
    Reply
  • wownwow
    The "Meltdown" and now "Foreshadow" triplets, these "repeatedly not following the specs" instances are now unlikely typical design bugs but the well-planned, INTENDED (as the ex-CEO said "the intended designs") cheating for performance!!!

    All the sellers selling the products with the known INTENDED flaws should be subjected to the fraud in a criminal court for selling such products!

    FTC employees are still hibernating with paycheck auto-and-direct deposit? The organizations of consumer's rights are also still hibernation?

    Intel is now upgraded to "Cheating Inside" from "Bug Inside"!

    Buy Intel "Cheating Inside" products and get unlimited all-you-can-have patches for free!
    Reply
  • alextheblue
    21234922 said:
    Speculative Execution - the gift that keeps on giving.
    The alternative isn't great either, FYI. Would you like a Bonnell-derived chip with complete garbage performance?
    Reply
  • Sam Hain
    21234922 said:
    Speculative Execution - the gift that keeps on giving.

    That last part of your statement, instantly put Cousin Eddie (from N'tl Lampoon's X-mas Vacation) in my head... Are we getting cousin Eddie (perpetually) as Intel customers???
    Reply