Replaced/repaired, not free. Having said that the problem will be how to replace processors that have become obsolete and therefore out of the market, and where you can not simply replace all the associated hardware to pick up a current and patched processor. And I suspect that most of those who can change the associated hardware will simply migrate to AMD instead of taking another Intel.
Oh I agree 1000%. It's not a freebie, it's Intel living up to the implicit contract to provide a CPU with the performance it was benchmarked when I bought it and not allow user mode stuff to read kernel memory.
In the UK you could make an argument that a processor with that bug was 'not fit for purpose'. Of course it's in the US that a class action suit has the highest chance of success and outside the US Intel will probably follow the US lead.
It'll be interesting to watch. Then again all my Intel chips are soldered to laptop motherboards. And rather elderly laptops at that - it's not like I'm going to convince Intel to convince Asus and Apple to recall motherboards that are out of warranty and do BGA rework to replace the CPUs.
However if I had machines with socketed CPUs and I was in the US I'd join a class action suit. Mind you Intel will presumably claim KPTI and its equivalents on Windows and macOS fix the security problem and any change in performance doesn't violate any sort of contractual agreement. Which they may or may not get away with. I think they probably will.
I don't care if the attorneys get all the cash. I'd like to see a huge judgement against Intel if alleged contract violations are proven in court but only because I'm a dreamer hoping to live long enough to see my country re-adopt the rule of law as its M.O. With NO exceptions based on class/wealth/connections/party affiliation.
Mind you Intel will presumably claim KPTI and its equivalents on Windows and macOS fix the security problem and any change in performance doesn't violate any sort of contractual agreement.
You are mentally modelling KPTI as an annoying one-time fix (with not much further burden), and not as a brittle work-around that requires permanent vigilance to pervasively deploy and enforce (Google's retpoline certainly falls into the class of permanent vigilance burdens).
Would be making Intel give up or provide free licenses to all its patents/copyrights on architectures older than the ones they were willing to replace processors on, and allow 3rd parties to develop compatible processors for Intel architecture motherboards.
Hell, while we are at it, force them to provide documentation for third party developers at some fixed licensing cost for the next 10 years as a punitive measure, opening us back up to second source motherboard and cpu chipsets, something Intel slowly for
I think you'd be hard pressed to convince US politicians of either party to go full on trustbusters on Intel. Especially as they'll claim they're not a monopoly.
Me too! But that's not how things work in the US. Anybody with a CPU that's out of support is SOL; if they are part of a class action that wins (bets on a buried clause somewhere that forces this all into individual arbitration?) they might get a coupon for a 5% (or $50, whichever is less) discount on a new computer if it's also Intel-based (and I'm one of those who would probably defect to AMD at least for the desktop system). The lawyers will get several 10s of million$. Even those with the newer chips -
One of the areas who's performance is clobbered by the meltdown & spectre bugs is virtualization and database operations. Its hugely dependent upon access to PTI, and a software fix to avoid the bugs basically hammers performance as much as 30%. That's pretty much why data centers are up in arms over this issue.
The bugs can't be fixed with CPU microcode patches; it will take a physical rearchitecting of the chips. I am in total agreement that Intel should replace these CPUs with corrected, remanufact
When you make your mark in the world, watch out for guys with erasers.
-- The Wall Street Journal
"I want repaired processors for free" (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, he's not wrong. This is, in impact, way bigger than Intel's FDIV fiasco and that ended up in recalls.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Free i5s and i7s! I want to believe!
Re: (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:"I want repaired processors for free" (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh I agree 1000%. It's not a freebie, it's Intel living up to the implicit contract to provide a CPU with the performance it was benchmarked when I bought it and not allow user mode stuff to read kernel memory.
In the UK you could make an argument that a processor with that bug was 'not fit for purpose'. Of course it's in the US that a class action suit has the highest chance of success and outside the US Intel will probably follow the US lead.
It'll be interesting to watch. Then again all my Intel chips are soldered to laptop motherboards. And rather elderly laptops at that - it's not like I'm going to convince Intel to convince Asus and Apple to recall motherboards that are out of warranty and do BGA rework to replace the CPUs.
However if I had machines with socketed CPUs and I was in the US I'd join a class action suit. Mind you Intel will presumably claim KPTI and its equivalents on Windows and macOS fix the security problem and any change in performance doesn't violate any sort of contractual agreement. Which they may or may not get away with. I think they probably will.
Re:"I want repaired processors for free" (Score:5, Interesting)
Some people are seeing >50% performance loss. Take a look at this graph: https://www.epicgames.com/fort... [epicgames.com]
Clearly they are going to need to spend some serious cash on upgrading their servers. The thread is full of players who can't connect.
Interestingly Intel's CPU data pages contain benchmarks. It will be interesting to see if they update them.
Re: (Score:2)
Some people are seeing >50% performance loss. Take a look at this graph: https://www.epicgames.com/fort [epicgames.com]...
Clearly they are going to need to spend some serious cash on upgrading their servers. The thread is full of players who can't connect.
Interesting. I reckon they'd have a case against Intel
Re: (Score:0)
Have you ever actually done a class action suit?
You get $8 and a coupon after 2 years of waiting.
They're pointless.
Re: (Score:2)
No dude. They'll give you, and more importantly, me a free i7.
Re: (Score:0)
I don't care if the attorneys get all the cash. I'd like to see a huge judgement against Intel if alleged contract violations are proven in court but only because I'm a dreamer hoping to live long enough to see my country re-adopt the rule of law as its M.O. With NO exceptions based on class/wealth/connections/party affiliation.
patch metabolism (Score:2)
You are mentally modelling KPTI as an annoying one-time fix (with not much further burden), and not as a brittle work-around that requires permanent vigilance to pervasively deploy and enforce (Google's retpoline certainly falls into the class of permanent vigilance burdens).
Not to mention that your carefully performance-b
The real solution... (Score:0)
Would be making Intel give up or provide free licenses to all its patents/copyrights on architectures older than the ones they were willing to replace processors on, and allow 3rd parties to develop compatible processors for Intel architecture motherboards.
Hell, while we are at it, force them to provide documentation for third party developers at some fixed licensing cost for the next 10 years as a punitive measure, opening us back up to second source motherboard and cpu chipsets, something Intel slowly for
Re: (Score:2)
I think you'd be hard pressed to convince US politicians of either party to go full on trustbusters on Intel. Especially as they'll claim they're not a monopoly.
Though they're definitely turning into one
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/m... [cpubenchmark.net]
Re: (Score:0)
Me too! But that's not how things work in the US. Anybody with a CPU that's out of support is SOL; if they are part of a class action that wins (bets on a buried clause somewhere that forces this all into individual arbitration?) they might get a coupon for a 5% (or $50, whichever is less) discount on a new computer if it's also Intel-based (and I'm one of those who would probably defect to AMD at least for the desktop system). The lawyers will get several 10s of million$. Even those with the newer chips -
Re: (Score:2)
One of the areas who's performance is clobbered by the meltdown & spectre bugs is virtualization and database operations. Its hugely dependent upon access to PTI, and a software fix to avoid the bugs basically hammers performance as much as 30%. That's pretty much why data centers are up in arms over this issue.
The bugs can't be fixed with CPU microcode patches; it will take a physical rearchitecting of the chips. I am in total agreement that Intel should replace these CPUs with corrected, remanufact