If You Are Thinking Of Getting A New Intel CPU For Your Computer... Wait

[SabreFan1]

There's a massive security flaw that has been found in the last 10 years worth of Intel CPU's that can only be fixed at the OS level.  That means that once the fix/update goes live, your computer will slow down anywhere from 5%-30% depending on your system specs and which CPU you are running.  Before anybody asks, no a direct microcode update will not fix the chips.

 

It affects Macs and PC's.

 

People were nervous something was up when, out of nowhere, Intel's CEO sold off a bunch of his personally owned Intel stock recently (Can you say "insider trading").  AMD's stock just got a needed bump from the news.

 

Details are still sketchy because since it's a security flaw, Intel and others are reluctant to share details until their fix goes live.

 

https://www.pcworld.com/article/3245606/security/intel-x86-cpu-kernel-bug-faq-how-it-affects-pc-mac.html

Quote

A massive, mysterious security flaw in Intel processors is forcing a redesign of the kernel software at the heart of all major operating systems, The Register is reporting. Since the issue lies directly in Intel’s x86-64 hardware, Windows, Linux, and Mac all need to protect against it. And worse, it appears that plugging the hole will negatively affect your PC’s performance.

 

 

[VanGnome]

A little misleading, this is basically something Intel needs to revise in future chip R&D sessions, but 99.999999% of this is "wait for the OS company to release a fix". Buying a new chip will be just as vulnerable now as your existing one, and will be fixed all the same. You could wait until intel releases updated batches, but you can be damned sure that retailers are going to be offloading their pre revised batched CPUs before selling the revised ones; that is unless Intel does a wholesale recall which I can't see happening since "OS update will fix the issue".

[Green Building]

As with any computer device I own, whether it be a laptop or a cell phone, as soon as I deem it to be working perfectly for my needs I turn updates off. Maybe I'm lucky, but my first smart phone lasted 7 & 1/2 years and counting (and to be honest I'll be happy if my new one lasts even half of that), and my laptop is going on 9 years.  

 

Updates are for suckers.

[SabreFan1]

7 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

A little misleading, this is basically something Intel needs to revise in future chip R&D sessions, but 99.999999% of this is "wait for the OS company to release a fix". Buying a new chip will be just as vulnerable now as your existing one, and will be fixed all the same. You could wait until intel releases updated batches, but you can be damned sure that retailers are going to be offloading their pre revised batched CPUs before selling the revised ones; that is unless Intel does a wholesale recall which I can't see happening since "OS update will fix the issue".

Actually nobody is trying to mislead with this one.  It's a very bad look for Intel and there's no way around it and they know it.  That's why the CEO of Intel dumped a lot of his stock right before they made a public announcement.

 

The rest of your post though is spot-on.  That's why people need to wait until they buy a new CPU.  They are going to try and offload the last of the bad ones and flood the market with them first.

 

AMD's Ryzen CPU's are looking like a good option for some people right about now.

[Fanuck]

Sounds like another Y2K apocalypse scare and in the end it was literally nothing to be concerned about. 

[VanGnome]

21 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

Actually nobody is trying to mislead with this one.  It's a very bad look for Intel and there's no way around it and they know it.  That's why the CEO of Intel dumped a lot of his stock right before they made a public announcement.

 

The rest of your post though is spot-on.  That's why people need to wait until they buy a new CPU.  They are going to try and offload the last of the bad ones and flood the market with them first.

 

AMD's Ryzen CPU's are looking like a good option for some people right about now.

I was referring to the title of your OP  @SabreFan1

[SabreFan1]

30 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

I was referring to the title of your OP  @SabreFan1

How is it misleading?  Intel eff'd up big time and it took them a decade to figure it out and now they are going to, or have already, dump(ed) a bunch of "bad" CPU's on the market before and most likely even after the announcement.

 

The title of the post is also spot-on.  If you buy a new CPU for your computer now, you are going to get one that will inevitably have the error.  Wait until the next batch with the microcode fix is available.  People will be posting in the future the batch codes of the fixed CPU's.

[SabreFan1]

42 minutes ago, Fanuck said:

Sounds like another Y2K apocalypse scare and in the end it was literally nothing to be concerned about. 

Read the article that I linked to.  It's not a scare at all.  It's something that already has a fix that is about to go live.  The problem is that the fix will slow people's computers down to varying degrees.  Some will get hit big, others not as much.  The people whose computers get slower by 5% won't notice.  Others who get slowed closer to the 30% that has been quoted, will definitely notice. 

[VanGnome]

14 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

Read the article that I linked to.  It's not a scare at all.  It's something that already has a fix that is about to go live.  The problem is that the fix will slow people's computers down to varying degrees.  Some will get hit big, others not as much.  The people whose computers get slower by 5% won't notice.  Others who get slowed closer to the 30% that has been quoted, will definitely notice. 

I read the article, my point is there no point in "waiting" to upgrade your cpu, either do it or don't, or upgrade to AMD. But suggesting a wait and see approach is worse because newer CPUs despite the flaw have enhanced tech that mitigates a lot of the affect. Older CPUs that aren't upgraded, like mine which might be on the threshold of being affected will get hit the most.

I currently have a i7 980X Extreme edition from March 2010, so about 2 years into this flaw. Personally I was going with Ryzen for my next build regardless of this flaw or not. So yeah if you need to upgrade, don't wait just do it.

[Angry Goose]

console for the win  

[hammertime]

LOL I just bought a new lappy with an i5. Sheeze

[Gnarcore]

Good thing I always buy AMD

[LordCanuck]

everyone that owns one should be given money for this bull.

[SabreFan1]

40 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

I read the article, my point is there no point in "waiting" to upgrade your cpu, either do it or don't, or upgrade to AMD. But suggesting a wait and see approach is worse because newer CPUs despite the flaw have enhanced tech that mitigates a lot of the affect. Older CPUs that aren't upgraded, like mine which might be on the threshold of being affected will get hit the most.

I currently have a i7 980X Extreme edition from March 2010, so about 2 years into this flaw. Personally I was going with Ryzen for my next build regardless of this flaw or not. So yeah if you need to upgrade, don't wait just do it.

I'd prefer not to even take the 5% hit on the new tech and wait a couple of months.  Obviously Intel's CEO is expecting the same response from businesses as well as consumers since he dumped a lot of his shares in the company.

[SabreFan1]

19 minutes ago, SILLY GOOSE said:

console for the win  

It actually may not hit gaming.  So far all non-DirectX games haven't taken a hit with the pre-release patches.

[SabreFan1]

2 minutes ago, LordCanuck said:

everyone that owns one should be given money for this bull.

Not gonna happen.  They'll get sued I'm sure but the only people who make real money on class action lawsuits are the lawyers.

[SabreFan1]

12 minutes ago, Gnarcore said:

Good thing I always buy AMD

AMD may initially end up being collateral damage at first depending on how the initial patches are implemented. 

[VanGnome]

3 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

I'd prefer not to even take the 5% hit on the new tech and wait a couple of months.  Obviously Intel's CEO is expecting the same response from businesses as well as consumers since he dumped a lot of his shares in the company.

That's the crux of my argument; you'd rather suffer a potential 30% loss instead of only a 5% loss or thereabouts? The OS fix is not even guaranteed to 100% resolve the issue, only significantly change the way the OS handles memory paging when it flips over to system level communication with the CPU. It may be 1-2 generations of CPU before this issue is fully R&D'd and pushed out to the market. I think we're going to see Intel relying heavily on OS manufacturers to resolve this issue instead of burning resources to re-architect current generation CPUs.

Anything older than the current or 1 generation older of CPUs will get hit for > 10% performance loss between now and when any OS patches are released. The older the CPU the bigger the hit due to limited instruction sets compared to more modern CPUs. The OS patch may resolve 1/2 to 2/3 of the performance slowdown, but the flaw is inherent in the architecture of the CPU itself; software can only do so much.

If you're going to wait, you may be waiting 1-2 years for retailers to push all the old, affected stock out to consumers. Microsoft may very well just take a blanket approach and apply the Kernel fix to AMD CPUs as well, fortunately I run Linux who will not be updating their kernel for AMD based CPUs, only Intel x86 CPUs.

[Angry Goose]

8 minutes ago, SabreFan1 said:

It actually may not hit gaming.  So far all non-DirectX games haven't taken a hit with the pre-release patches.

oh im sure and FTR I dont know a thing about computers (or care for what's better).  Just joshin ya

[SabreFan1]

22 minutes ago, VanGnome said:

That's the crux of my argument; you'd rather suffer a potential 30% loss instead of only a 5% loss or thereabouts? The OS fix is not even guaranteed to 100% resolve the issue, only significantly change the way the OS handles memory paging when it flips over to system level communication with the CPU. It may be 1-2 generations of CPU before this issue is fully R&D'd and pushed out to the market. I think we're going to see Intel relying heavily on OS manufacturers to resolve this issue instead of burning resources to re-architect current generation CPUs.

Anything older than the current or 1 generation older of CPUs will get hit for > 10% performance loss between now and when any OS patches are released. The older the CPU the bigger the hit due to limited instruction sets compared to more modern CPUs. The OS patch may resolve 1/2 to 2/3 of the performance slowdown, but the flaw is inherent in the architecture of the CPU itself; software can only do so much.

If you're going to wait, you may be waiting 1-2 years for retailers to push all the old, affected stock out to consumers. Microsoft may very well just take a blanket approach and apply the Kernel fix to AMD CPUs as well, fortunately I run Linux who will not be updating their kernel for AMD based CPUs, only Intel x86 CPUs.

You're repeating the technical aspects on what all of the early articles out there are saying.

 

I think you aren't giving Intel enough credit.  Now that the problem is recognized, I think they'll have it fixed by the time they burn their next batch of CPU's.  The supply problems will be in the pre-made boxed computers.  That's where the problem CPU's will linger the longest.  Direct to consumer sellers like Newegg will burn through their stock of the "bad" CPU's within a couple of months.

 

My post was geared towards the people who upgrade/build their own computers.  Those who buy from HP/Dell/etc. are the ones who will be stuck with the flawed CPU's the longest because they buy in massive bulk whereas places like Newegg and NCIX buy in lot amounts of 10,000 at a time.