Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

perens.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 499 posts

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#211

Post by glenneroo »

lagadu wrote: post #117
wtallis wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we tech journalists were actually seriously concerned that Intel would be dumb enough to try to enforce those provisions against us, then we'd just ask the motherboard vendors for updated pre-release firmware that incorporates the new microcode but doesn't come with Intel's license agreement attached. We often go that route anyways because it's easier to update the motherboard than to ensure that every OS you're t…

Also if you get the update via windows update you get the patch without having ever agreed to the no-benchmarking clause, so you're free to publish anyway.

Windows Updates used to pop up an EULA to be agreed upon before installing certain anti-malware related software, not sure if that's the case anymore with Windows 10 auto-install-and-reboot procedure. I wonder if Intel could/would try to have Microsoft insert another click-to-agree EULA for this upcoming patch?

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#212

Post by Yokohiii »

muppetman wrote: post #3
johnklos wrote: post #2

I'm really curious how Intel could even imagine this is enforceable. For instance, if I have a server with shell access for many users, am I supposed to forbid my users from publishing benchmarks? If they do, am I liable since I "agreed" to the license? Or are they, even though they never "agreed" to the license? It just doesn't make sense.

Surely it's just designed to scare the big media websites from publishing numbers.

I'd rather assume that it is in place to keep kernel and distro devs at bay.

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#213

Post by KozmoNau7 »

headmelted wrote: post #50

Before Zen, we all kind of assumed they were so far ahead that AMD were more likely to be out of business before they would ever be a credible threat again. I actually thought Intel must have had some tricks up their sleeves in terms of performance gains that we hadn't seen yet, simply because there was no market need to roll them out and they had so many years of coasting on marginal gains. Seeing them taking this s…

Intel are still ahead in low power mobile (laptop) CPU race, and the clear leader in the laptop market. Who knows for how long, though?

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#214

Post by wolfgke »

verbify wrote: post #174
wolfgke wrote: post #147

My thougt based on the HN headline "Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed" (after having read the article, of course): Doesn't this show that it is time for someone to set up some kind of "ScienceLeaks" website, where scientists can upload research (results, papers, ...) anonymously which they are are not allowed to do legally because of various such "research-restricting" laws. ---…

Why would the legal risk ever be over?

> Why would the legal risk ever be over?

I can imagine some scenarios:

- A company is bought by another one which has a different legal policy and voids some legal restrictions even retroactively

- By some other way, the "illegal" knowledge in the paper became "public knowledge", so that company lawyers will have a hard(er) time convincing a judge that the respective paper is of any danger and thus the author to be prosecuted. For example: After these microcode patches, people will of course privately do benchmark the performance differences. So some years later, the order of performance differences are kind of public knowledge.

- With time, companies have a much less legal interest to sue people for disclosre. As long as there is a high commercial interest, companies can be very "sue-happy". On the other hand, each of these lawsuits is a PR risk for the company. If the respective product becomes outdated, the ecomonical advantage of a lawsuite is much less than the probable PR loss.

- The researcher now (later on) lives in a different country that has a different legal system where there is much less legal risk. For example, in Germany, it is very restricted what can be included in the general business terms (in opposite to the USA).

In all of these cases, it can become much less legally dangerous to disclose the real identity of the author. On the other hand, there exists an incentive (academic credit) to do so.

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#215

Post by tomp »

bluecalm wrote: post #100

Here is one thing we can do about it: make public service announcement to our users that we no longer recommend Intel CPUs because of security holes, censorship and crippled performance. I am going to do that today. While we only have several thousand users they do CPU intensive work, buy a lot of new CPUs and rent a lot of servers. My small contribution will likely amount to low-mid 6 figures out of Intel pocket in…

Honest question: is AMD any better? Do they somehow manage to avoid Spectre / Meltdown without a slowdown?

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#216

Post by glenneroo »

iforgotpassword wrote: post #125
radialbrain wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen https://www.raptorcs.com/TALOSII/ ? Typing this on my own right now.

Fails the 'reasonable pricing' check. Who's gonna pay 6x of what you pay for a comparable intel system? This is only for the super-enthusiast.

Technology often starts out expensive and enthusiast only, but if Intel keeps throwing these wild punches in every direction, why wouldn't we see a steady migration to alternatives? AMD is definitely benefiting from Intel's recent decisions, I am sure Raptor is also starting to get more business. A few more years of shady Intel decisions combined with sufficient negative press and I am sure the market will gladly decide. There are surely plenty of large corporations who can afford the costs and would prefer being able to audit everything themselves. This seems like the perfect storm for competition to finally have a chance.

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#217

Post by KozmoNau7 »

SmellyGeekBoy wrote: post #148
eksemplar wrote: post #11

Aside from my vic20 and c64 I’ve only ever owned intel CPUs, and those two may have been intel as well, I wouldn’t know. I’ve never made a decision to chose Intel based on benchmark, I’ve bought them because they’ve always been great for me. So it’ll be ironic when I buy an AMD processor when I upgrade for cyberpunk 2077, because of benchmarks. Not because AMD is faster, they may be but I wouldn’t know, no, it’ll be…

Similar to my story. Apart from an Athlon 650 around 2000-era we've always been an Intel household. I recently upgraded my gaming PC and went with the Ryzen 7 2700X, partly due to the way Intel have been treating their customers like idiots lately. I'm seriously considering AMD for the graphics card too (currently running a GTX 970) as I may well be moving my main gaming PC over to Linux in the near future.

I replaced my GTX 460 with an RX 560, no regrets at all. It uses the AMDGPU open source kernel driver and MESA on the userspace side, so it's supported outright on rolling release distros with no additional steps, and trivially easy to install on any recent normal release distro.

For Linux Mint 19 (based on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS), I had to add a PPA with the newest MESA drivers, other than that no issues at all.

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#218

Post by jacques_chester »

snaky wrote: post #203
shriver wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's remarkable how little we've seen from that acquisition. It's perfectly possible that Intel has butchered the acquisition the same way they have with many others.

The two huge companies being merged is more often considered fail than otherwise. > a 2004 study by Bain & Company found that 70 percent of mergers failed to increase shareholder value. More recently, a 2007 study by Hay Group and the Sorbonne found that more than 90 percent of mergers in Europe fail to reach financial goals. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/BUSINESS/05/21/merger.marriage/ Especially when the merge should…

Billion Dollar Lessons by Mui & Carroll goes through a lot of these grand strategies and demonstrates how much of a bonfire they turned out to be.

Re: Intel Publishes Microcode Patches, No Benchmarking or Comparison Allowed

#219

Post by lawlessone »

KozmoNau7 wrote: post #213
headmelted wrote: post #50

Before Zen, we all kind of assumed they were so far ahead that AMD were more likely to be out of business before they would ever be a credible threat again. I actually thought Intel must have had some tricks up their sleeves in terms of performance gains that we hadn't seen yet, simply because there was no market need to roll them out and they had so many years of coasting on marginal gains. Seeing them taking this s…

Intel are still ahead in low power mobile (laptop) CPU race, and the clear leader in the laptop market. Who knows for how long, though?

>Intel are still ahead in low power mobile CPU race,

I never met a person with a smart phone that uses an intel chip. They probably exist but i know none.

Apple aren't using them. Samsung aren't.. HTC nope.. Google pixel nope...

Intel basically sold off/scuttled their mobile division right before the iphone took off.

Post reply on HN