Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 26

Thread: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    27,514
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1,700 times in 589 posts

    Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    But Intel released Coffee Lake, and its CEO sold millions of shares, knowing of issues.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    112
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    4 times in 4 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Not even close to "minimal impact".
    Look at all 4 statements.

    Apple - listing cherry-picked artificial benchmarks, which are simply ignoring everything that those benchmarks don't test.
    Microsoft - forced patching of the affected areas to mitigate the issue.
    Amazon - what about the "minority".
    Google - again if the majority are only affected negligibly, what about the minority.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,393
    Thanks
    277
    Thanked
    290 times in 201 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Seems odd for Microsoft to say nothing to see hear as their customers are reporting problems with their virtual machines.

  4. #4
    Pork & Beans Powerup Phage's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Kent
    Posts
    6,074
    Thanks
    1,485
    Thanked
    575 times in 491 posts
    • Phage's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Crosshair VI
      • CPU:
      • 1700x @ 3.9
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb Corsair LPX
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 960 512Gb + 2Tb Seagate SSHD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 1080ti
      • PSU:
      • BeQuiet 850w
      • Case:
      • Fractal R4
      • Operating System:
      • W10 64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Agon Gsync

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Quote Originally Posted by ByteMyAscii View Post
    Not even close to "minimal impact".
    Look at all 4 statements.

    Apple - listing cherry-picked artificial benchmarks, which are simply ignoring everything that those benchmarks don't test.
    Microsoft - forced patching of the affected areas to mitigate the issue.
    Amazon - what about the "minority".
    Google - again if the majority are only affected negligibly, what about the minority.
    They are clearly protecting their own Server/Cloud/Other businesses
    Society's to blame,
    Or possibly Atari.

  5. #5
    Long member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    683
    Thanks
    29
    Thanked
    141 times in 102 posts
    • philehidiot's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Father's bored
      • CPU:
      • Cockroach brain V0.1
      • Memory:
      • Innebriated, unwritten
      • Storage:
      • Big Yellow Self Storage
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Semi chewed Crayola Mega Pack
      • PSU:
      • 20KW single phase direct grid supply
      • Case:
      • Closed, Open, Cold
      • Operating System:
      • Cockroach
      • Monitor(s):
      • The mental health nurses
      • Internet:
      • Please.

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    I honestly expect that ~90% of their customers will notice no difference whatsoever. Those running specific workloads will have problems but hopefully once the hole is sealed there will be optimisations released which will mitigate the impact. At the moment everyone is panicking for no justifiable reason. Wait and see what the real world impact actually is. At the moment we've got Which magazine putting crap all over Facebook implying that people will all experience around a 30% performance hit rather than explaining this was a synthetic benchmark on an OS that hardly any of their readers will use and employing a workload in a setting they're even less likely to use. Once the hole is sealed, they can work on optimisations for those people who are really impacted. For gamers, this just appears to be a non issue for the time being. We just need to be less dramatic about this - the security hole is clearly a major issue. The fallout should be manageable although there are some people who are going to have to use the opportunity to switch to Ryzen. In that case, I would say they should be reimbursed by a class action or something similar.

    EDIT: What is going to happen to Intel is that people will probably stop buying their CPUs until new architecture comes out fixing the flaw. By the sounds of it, AMD won't have such issues.

    EDIT EDIT: I do wonder if the CEO will be investigated for selling his shares with insider knowledge??
    Last edited by philehidiot; 05-01-2018 at 01:52 PM. Reason: I'm an idiot.

  6. #6
    Ryzen Master race outwar6010's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Londinium
    Posts
    1,843
    Thanks
    346
    Thanked
    210 times in 141 posts
    • outwar6010's system
      • Motherboard:
      • asus Crosshair x370
      • CPU:
      • 1800x @ Stock
      • Memory:
      • Team Group Dark Pro Edition 16GB (2X8GB) DDR4 PC4-25600C14 3200MHZ
      • Storage:
      • More than most
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nzxt g12 1080ti
      • PSU:
      • corsair ax 760
      • Case:
      • Corsair 900d
      • Operating System:
      • windows 10 pro 64 bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • hp omen 32
      • Internet:
      • Bt infinite

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    I thought this was the emergency fix and not the full one which is expected to cause a bigger difference... Also Hardware unboxed noticed fairly big differences in their m.2 speeds post patch.
    "Anger is an acid that can do more harm to the vessel in which it is stored than to anything on which it is poured."


  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,393
    Thanks
    277
    Thanked
    290 times in 201 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Quote Originally Posted by philehidiot View Post
    I honestly expect that ~90% of their customers will notice no difference whatsoever. Those running specific workloads will have problems but hopefully once the hole is sealed there will be optimisations released which will mitigate the impact. At the moment everyone is panicking for no justifiable reason. Wait and see what the real world impact actually is. At the moment we've got Which magazine putting crap all over Facebook implying that people will all experience around a 30% performance hit rather than explaining this was a synthetic benchmark on an OS that hardly any of their readers will use and employing a workload in a setting they're even less likely to use. Once the hole is sealed, they can work on optimisations for those people who are really impacted. For gamers, this just appears to be a non issue for the time being. We just need to be less dramatic about this - the security hole is clearly a major issue. The fallout should be manageable although there are some people who are going to have to use the opportunity to switch to Ryzen. In that case, I would say they should be reimbursed by a class action or something similar.
    I agree most people won't notice a difference however it's going to take a long time to seal some, or all, of the holes and until they are sealed the workarounds are going to have a noticeable impact on performance in some workloads, that will improve overtime as currently the fixes/workarounds are probably taking a scorched earth approach, that will take time to change as software developers will need to rewrite their code to excluded certain data from speculative execution.

  8. #8
    Senior Member kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    28,812
    Thanks
    1,431
    Thanked
    2,856 times in 2,319 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte X58A UD3R rev 2
      • CPU:
      • Intel Xeon X5680
      • Memory:
      • 12gb DDR3 2000
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2311H
      • Internet:
      • O2 8mbps

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Quote Originally Posted by outwar6010 View Post
    I thought this was the emergency fix and not the full one which is expected to cause a bigger difference... Also Hardware unboxed noticed fairly big differences in their m.2 speeds post patch.
    I read it the other way around - this patch has the biggest impact, which will be mitigated more in future patches. Noticing an impact in m.2 speeds isn't the same thing as seeing much of a real-world impact.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Xlucine's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    1,360
    Thanks
    203
    Thanked
    100 times in 85 posts
    • Xlucine's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z97MX Gaming 5
      • CPU:
      • i5 4690K @stock
      • Memory:
      • 16GB @2133 11-11-11-27
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX500 1TB, Crucial MX100 512GB, 2TB hard disk
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 980ti
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic S12G-550
      • Case:
      • Silverstone TJ08-E
      • Operating System:
      • W10 pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Viewsonic vx3211-2k-mhd, Dell P2414H
      • Internet:
      • Virgin 150 mb fibre

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Quote Originally Posted by outwar6010 View Post
    I thought this was the emergency fix and not the full one which is expected to cause a bigger difference... Also Hardware unboxed noticed fairly big differences in their m.2 speeds post patch.
    If the emergency fix fills the hole, and has less performance impact than the full fix, why bother developing the full fix? The rushed-out-in-six-months fix we've got now can only be slower than any further fixes.

  10. #10
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Posts
    76
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 3 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    CEO sells up, smells like insider trading !

  11. #11
    Gentoo Ricer
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Galway
    Posts
    10,859
    Thanks
    958
    Thanked
    925 times in 688 posts
    • aidanjt's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Strix Z370-G
      • CPU:
      • Intel i7-8700K
      • Memory:
      • 2x8GB Corsiar LPX 3000C15
      • Storage:
      • 500GB Samsung 960 EVO
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0
      • PSU:
      • EVGA G3 750W
      • Case:
      • Fractal Design Define C Mini
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Pro
      • Monitor(s):
      • Asus MG279Q
      • Internet:
      • 240mbps Virgin Cable

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Quote Originally Posted by kalniel View Post
    Noticing an impact in m.2 speeds isn't the same thing as seeing much of a real-world impact.
    It would if your real world application is heavily disk I/O bound.
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent View Post
    ...every time Creative bring out a new card range their advertising makes it sound like they have discovered a way to insert a thousand Chuck Norris super dwarfs in your ears...

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,393
    Thanks
    277
    Thanked
    290 times in 201 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Interestingly heavy disk I/O seems to be all up in the air, PCPer did some testing and found both losses and oddly some configurations saw gains, it's all very confusing.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Sussex
    Posts
    1,049
    Thanks
    61
    Thanked
    131 times in 123 posts
    • kompukare's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus P8Z77-V LX
      • CPU:
      • Intel i5-3570K
      • Memory:
      • 2 x 8GB Crucial Ballistix Elite PC3-14900
      • Storage:
      • Crucial MX200 | Sandisk Extreme 120GB SSD | WDC 1TB Green | Samsung 1Tb Spinpoint
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire R9 290 VaporX 7950
      • PSU:
      • Antec 650 Gold TruePower (Seasonic) or Seasonic SII-330
      • Case:
      • Aerocool DS 200 (silenced, 53.6 litres)l)
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10-64
      • Monitor(s):
      • 2 x Dell P2414H

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    So much for only Meltdown causing a slowdown though.

    This user on Reddit ran Realbench with the Windows patch and again with the patch and BIOS microcode update (which is AFAIK only for the Spectre bugs):
    https://np.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace...atch_and_bios/

    The imaging results look rather bad at over -21%.
    Interesting but RealBench is hardly a good benchmark.


    Huge CPU usage increase when Epic Games upgraded one of their servers for Meltdown

    https://www.epicgames.com/fortnite/f...ability-update

    Guess, there might be little reason for a gaming server to be super secure so they might not need the patch. Eventually anyway, once they separate their concerns so that another server handles authentication etc. and then the server serving only games can be left less secure. But that kind of work is not instant.

    Seems one one of the methods the Linux kernel guys want to use is pretty useless on Skylake+ (Skylake, Kabylake, Coffeelake etc.) as it gets optimised?
    Retpoline as a mitigation strategy swaps indirect branches for returns,
    to avoid using predictions which come from the BTB, as they can be
    poisoned by an attacker.

    The problem with Skylake+ is that an RSB underflow falls back to using a
    BTB prediction, which allows the attacker to take control of speculation.
    https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/1/4/724

    So, 'minimal' real world impact as long as you're not running any of those loads.

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,393
    Thanks
    277
    Thanked
    290 times in 201 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    The thing is it seems some benchmark software will need to be rewritten because of the way these vulnerabilities are being mitigated, currently some (most?) benchmarks hammer the very thing that was exploitable and the fixes have hobbled that, most everyday workloads don't hammer a processors local memory so when a context switch does happen the penalty is relatively small, however if, as it seems benchmarks are doing, you perform lots of context switching those small delays add up.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    161
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 3 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    Quote Originally Posted by outwar6010 View Post
    I thought this was the emergency fix and not the full one which is expected to cause a bigger difference... Also Hardware unboxed noticed fairly big differences in their m.2 speeds post patch.
    full patch is out, you are using it

  16. #16
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    34
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    3 times in 2 posts

    Re: Intel: CPU patch has minimal impact in the real-world

    I'm running an I5 processor are there any benchmarks showing performance impact while streaming pron? It's the biggest workload for my PC and I'm sure a real world task many users would be interested to see...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •