Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 22 of 22

Thread: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

  1. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    4,932
    Thanks
    171
    Thanked
    383 times in 310 posts
    • badass's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS P8Z77-m pro
      • CPU:
      • Core i5 3570K
      • Memory:
      • 32GB
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 2TB WD Green
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Radeon RX 580
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX520W
      • Case:
      • Silverstone SG02-F
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 X64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Del U2311, LG226WTQ
      • Internet:
      • 80/20 FTTC

    Re: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    Before Spectre/meltdown were published, but I think after they were discovered. So either they knew before the rest of us because that is their job to be well informed, or this is one of those ideas where it was just the right time for it to be discovered.



    I interpreted what he said as "Don't bother tracking all the flaws, just patch as most users won't notice any difference."

    Obviously there are some outliers like Cat with his sluggish Fallout game, and Linux developers whose compiles might go 20% slower, but I hear very few people complain that their PC has slowed from the fixes.
    Exactly. What almost everyone outside the security industry doesn't understand is that none of these processor flaws are easy to exploit. I've given up searching for exploits for any of these flaws using anything other than the proof of concept code as I haven't found any. 8 months later.

    To provide context, typically exploits are written and are in active usage less than 4 hours after an MS patch Tuesday release.

    I'm more worried about a meteor hitting my house in a direct hit than any of these flaws being exploited on my machine.

    However, certain businesses absolutely need to be aware of the risks and mitigations. Like those that might be targets of nation state hackers for example.

    The context of my response was the OP worrying about keeping track of all of these flaws and their possible fixes. There is no need for a home user to do that. Just cross your fingers you're not an edge case like CAT and that a windows update doesn't slow your game down. These are extremely low risk vulnerabilities for home users.
    "In a perfect world... spammers would get caught, go to jail, and share a cell with many men who have enlarged their penises, taken Viagra and are looking for a new relationship."

  2. #18
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozaron View Post
    Well, you'd have far less "please Bethesda do something vaguely competent and make a game engine which isn't awful, or at least patch improve this one" social engineering work to do.


    Well I am less and less likely to buy Fallout 76 the more I hear about it,so at least its a start!! Its a shame since the Fallout universe is probably my favourite gaming universe.

    Quote Originally Posted by badass View Post
    Just cross your fingers you're not an edge case like CAT and that a windows update doesn't slow your game down.
    Well its more the case many reviewers seem to not understand the games they are benchmarking,ie,even with Fallout 4 many didn't seem to understand what areas need to be tested for CPU limitations,and one of them was user built settlements,ie,most of the benchmarks for the game were pointless especially since the game is capped at around 72FPS,since the physics go out of sync any higher than that,and review sites removed the cap. Its also the case with games testing with the patches - the only games which seem to have been affected by more than 5% are two openworld games. Even DF only saw that 10% decrease since they are more a gaming website who tests hardware,so have a bit of a clue where to test for CPU limited areas.

    TBH,that could be an entire thread on its own regarding games testing,but I doubt much is going to change especially since companies seem to be giving less time for reviewers to actually test things now.
    Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 16-08-2018 at 02:09 PM.

  3. #19
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,978
    Thanks
    778
    Thanked
    1,586 times in 1,341 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 5900X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 2TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 39 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 900Mb/900Mb (CityFibre FttP)

    Re: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

    Quote Originally Posted by Ozaron View Post
    Strange how some people in the not so distant past crowed and rejoiced over the IPC and speed benefits transitioning from Ivy through to Kaby, then upon losing most of that clock for clock in security updates they "don't even notice", it's almost as if they couldn't tell the difference to start with.
    I think they generally couldn't see the gain either, but it amazes me how people see a 5% advantage on a benchmark graph and start using words like "destroyed" and "dominated". In a proper blind trial, they probably couldn't tell if they were using a particular CPU or the generation before it.

  4. #20
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

    Quote Originally Posted by DanceswithUnix View Post
    I think they generally couldn't see the gain either, but it amazes me how people see a 5% advantage on a benchmark graph and start using words like "destroyed" and "dominated". In a proper blind trial, they probably couldn't tell if they were using a particular CPU or the generation before it.
    I find it weirder when they say the same of games where all the CPUs are pushing past 120FPS or all the CPUs are pushing between 70FPS to 100FPS,ie,120HZ won't be doable and then say "destroyed" or "dominated".

    There are also other situations,where they misread the 720p graphs and don't seem to fathom the game is actually more GPU limited at 1080p and above.

  5. #21
    Banhammer in peace PeterB kalniel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    31,023
    Thanks
    1,870
    Thanked
    3,381 times in 2,718 posts
    • kalniel's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z390 Aorus Ultra
      • CPU:
      • Intel i9 9900k
      • Memory:
      • 32GB DDR4 3200 CL16
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Samsung 970Evo+ NVMe
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GTX 1060 6GB
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 600W
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master HAF 912
      • Operating System:
      • Win 10 Pro x64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell S2721DGF
      • Internet:
      • rubbish

    Re: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    TBH,that could be an entire thread on its own regarding games testing,but I doubt much is going to change especially since companies seem to be giving less time for reviewers to actually test things now.
    Go for it Of course, the more open world/user moddable a game is, the harder it is to test.

  6. #22
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    32,039
    Thanks
    3,910
    Thanked
    5,224 times in 4,015 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Intel releases updates for 'Foreshadow' CPU flaws

    Quote Originally Posted by kalniel View Post
    Go for it Of course, the more open world/user moddable a game is, the harder it is to test.
    Maybe but it's still important to kind of investigate the games you are testing and usually you get an inkling from forums where people start to see issues in the game.

    HardOCP were the only site to test settlements and did a 5 minute test run:
    https://images.hardocp.com/images/ar...jlakgl_5_1.png



    This is what put me off Ryzen MK1 and why I will never buy it.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

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
  •