Corsair M55 RGB PRO gaming mouse review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
Lexar NM600 NVMe M.2. SSD (480GB) review
Tech preview: Radeon RX 5700 and 5700 XT
Tech preview: AMD Ryzen 3000 - 7nm ZEN2
Patriot Viper VPN100 M2 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
Samsung 970 EVO Plus 2TB NVMe M.2. SSD review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - May 2019
Promo: URCDKey Summer Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
DeepCool Matrexx 70 Chassis review
Intel Cascade Lake Processors To Get Hardware Protections Against Spectre
Intel has announced it is releasing the first series of Xeon processors under the name cascade lake in the second half of this year. The new processors will be hardware protected against the second variant of the Spectre vulnerability, or at least better protected.
Cascade Lake will be a 14nm refresh of Skylake-E/X. In addition to that, Core processors of the 8th generation that will be released in the second half of 2018 will be protected against Spectre variant 2 and Meltdown. precisely which processors that entail is not explained. For the first variant of Spectre, protection remains to be a software-based solution, for the time being. Intel did not publish any details on the hardware protection.
Intel - While Variant 1 will continue to be addressed via software mitigations, we are making changes to our hardware design to further address the other two. We have redesigned parts of the processor to introduce new levels of protection through partitioning that will protect against both Variants 2 and 3. Think of this partitioning as additional “protective walls” between applications and user privilege levels to create an obstacle for bad actors. These changes will begin with our next-generation Intel® Xeon® Scalable processors (code-named Cascade Lake) as well as 8th Generation Intel® Core™ processors expected to ship in the second half of 2018. As we bring these new products to market, ensuring that they deliver the performance improvements people expect from us is critical. Our goal is to offer not only the best performance, but also the best secure performance.
Intel cancels WiGig cards and 802.11ad docking parts - 09/10/2017 09:23 AM
Intel is halting production for 60 GHz 802.11ad WIFI on their laptop and thus other add-in modules. The AD WIFI connection uses the 60hz band, and in a direct line of sight you can reach 7 Gbit/s on s...
Intel Cancels Intel Developer Forum - 04/18/2017 08:08 AM
And that's now and in the future. We are a bit puzzled as to what is going on with Intel these days, last year here in the Netherlands and well, many other spots in the EU, they cancelled all press-a...
Intel Cannon Lake Mobile Processors This Year? - 04/05/2017 08:59 PM
While it's not exactly a surprize as we mentioned this a couple of times already Intel last week confirmed it on their technology and manufacturing day, their new 14nm ++ process. Intel also announce...
Next Gen Intel Cannon Lake 15% faster and again a 14nm processor - 02/10/2017 06:37 PM
Intel held an investor day briefing yesterday in which it made some claims on the next generation desktop processors. The CPUs next in line will be based on Cannon Lake, interesting to see it that it...
Intel cancels Kaby Lake-H - Kaby Lake Refresh will be Core ix 8000 series - 12/28/2016 11:01 AM
A new road-map from Intel surfaced on the web with the Kaby lake refresh processors, these were called Kaby Lake-H. The new Kaby Lake Refresh models however will be called the Core ix 8000 series and...
AsiJu
Senior Member
Posts: 5611
Joined: 2010-10-16
Senior Member
Posts: 5611
Joined: 2010-10-16
#5528728 Posted on: 03/16/2018 10:29 AM
How about Meltdown? Can it be fixed via hardware without needing firmware level protection or would that need redesigning the architecture?
Not implying anything, just curious.
How about Meltdown? Can it be fixed via hardware without needing firmware level protection or would that need redesigning the architecture?
Not implying anything, just curious.
RealNC
Senior Member
Posts: 2858
Joined: 2011-11-24
Senior Member
Posts: 2858
Joined: 2011-11-24
#5528732 Posted on: 03/16/2018 11:01 AM
I love how "we're fixing our broken shit" turns into "it's protected against" in marketing. It's like shipping a car that randomly explodes, and then in the new model you're saying "we're so awesome, the new car is even better than the old one, it's protected against randomly exploding."
I love how "we're fixing our broken shit" turns into "it's protected against" in marketing. It's like shipping a car that randomly explodes, and then in the new model you're saying "we're so awesome, the new car is even better than the old one, it's protected against randomly exploding."
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10336
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10336
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5528735 Posted on: 03/16/2018 11:36 AM
Yeah, nothing has changed my opinion about Intel as much as how they treated the whole Meltdown / Spectre topic, along with their lackluster support combined with that all too clearly noobish PR along...
I love how "we're fixing our broken crap" turns into "it's protected against" in marketing. It's like shipping a car that randomly explodes, and then in the new model you're saying "we're so awesome, the new car is even better than the old one, it's protected against randomly exploding."
Yeah, nothing has changed my opinion about Intel as much as how they treated the whole Meltdown / Spectre topic, along with their lackluster support combined with that all too clearly noobish PR along...
Embra
Senior Member
Posts: 834
Joined: 2014-11-19
Senior Member
Posts: 834
Joined: 2014-11-19
#5528739 Posted on: 03/16/2018 12:55 PM
And of course the "NEW" cpus will have this protection built-in, so run out and grab you one. I am still hopeful for a proper fix for my 4790k.
And of course the "NEW" cpus will have this protection built-in, so run out and grab you one. I am still hopeful for a proper fix for my 4790k.
NaturalViolence
Member
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-10-01
Member
Posts: 67
Joined: 2009-10-01
#5528755 Posted on: 03/16/2018 02:03 PM
Why are all of the comments here negative while all of the comments in the thread where AMD announced the same thing (they are fixing it in their next cpu uarch release) positive?
Why are all of the comments here negative while all of the comments in the thread where AMD announced the same thing (they are fixing it in their next cpu uarch release) positive?
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6874
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 6874
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5528761 Posted on: 03/16/2018 02:14 PM
ryzen did that to them last year/ all hail ryzen
Why are all of the comments here negative while all of the comments in the thread where AMD announced the same thing (they are fixing it in their next cpu uarch release) positive?
ryzen did that to them last year/ all hail ryzen
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 2017-02-14
Senior Member
Posts: 509
Joined: 2017-02-14
#5528762 Posted on: 03/16/2018 02:15 PM
I think it's because Intel is using a flaw in there CPU's as a positive to market future products.
Why are all of the comments here negative while all of the comments in the thread where AMD announced the same thing (they are fixing it in their next cpu uarch release) positive?
I think it's because Intel is using a flaw in there CPU's as a positive to market future products.
nevcairiel
Senior Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 2015-05-19
Senior Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 2015-05-19
#5528927 Posted on: 03/17/2018 10:44 AM
How about Meltdown? Can it be fixed via hardware without needing firmware level protection or would that need redesigning the architecture?
Intel calls Meltdown "Spectre Variant 3", and its being fixed/mitigated by these hardware revisions.
How about Meltdown? Can it be fixed via hardware without needing firmware level protection or would that need redesigning the architecture?
Intel calls Meltdown "Spectre Variant 3", and its being fixed/mitigated by these hardware revisions.
nevcairiel
Senior Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 2015-05-19
Senior Member
Posts: 559
Joined: 2015-05-19
#5528928 Posted on: 03/17/2018 10:46 AM
A proper fix is updated hardware, which clearly is not something they can do for old CPUs.
Fixed microcode is available for the 4790k already, so either wait for your BIOS to get an update, or Microsoft to include the Microcode in their update (they only do Skylake to Coffee Lake so far, but plan to extend the update to include many more).
And of course the "NEW" cpus will have this protection built-in, so run out and grab you one. I am still hopeful for a proper fix for my 4790k.
A proper fix is updated hardware, which clearly is not something they can do for old CPUs.
Fixed microcode is available for the 4790k already, so either wait for your BIOS to get an update, or Microsoft to include the Microcode in their update (they only do Skylake to Coffee Lake so far, but plan to extend the update to include many more).
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 10336
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 10336
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5529232 Posted on: 03/19/2018 09:42 AM
Because people favour the underdog. And to be honest, Intel lost lots of it's credibility with the whole Spectre Meltdown thing and how they treated it.... I'm quite upset with them too.
Why are all of the comments here negative while all of the comments in the thread where AMD announced the same thing (they are fixing it in their next cpu uarch release) positive?
Because people favour the underdog. And to be honest, Intel lost lots of it's credibility with the whole Spectre Meltdown thing and how they treated it.... I'm quite upset with them too.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9005
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9005
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5529234 Posted on: 03/19/2018 10:06 AM
When Intel downplays quite serious flaw (no admin rights needed to gain protected information of other processes). And does it 6 months after they get awareness of it, It does not give good PR. Especially since they did not deliver fixes withing those 6 months and after public got informed most of their clients are still waiting. (9 months gone and counting)
On other hand, you have Day-1 release of AMD's flaws with clearly malicious intent. And those Flaws are blown out of proportion.
(Needs admin rights to do Sh*t which is pretty complicated to pull out and needs different development of hack for each specific MB it is supposed to hack. => High failure rate, more likely bricked Mobo than successful infection of BIOS.)
Secondly they demonstrated that they did modify string in BIOS which booted. Sorry, people do that daily. They did not demonstrate ability to run custom code. I mean, people modified/removed parts of intel's IME firmware. That means they successfully pulled very thing those guys blamed AMD for having somewhat possible. But in contrast did not show that they were able to do it.
So, why the hell would someone be kind to intel and bash AMD at same time? If I would like to bash AMD, I would have to declare war on intel to keep it proportional.
Why are all of the comments here negative while all of the comments in the thread where AMD announced the same thing (they are fixing it in their next cpu uarch release) positive?
When Intel downplays quite serious flaw (no admin rights needed to gain protected information of other processes). And does it 6 months after they get awareness of it, It does not give good PR. Especially since they did not deliver fixes withing those 6 months and after public got informed most of their clients are still waiting. (9 months gone and counting)
On other hand, you have Day-1 release of AMD's flaws with clearly malicious intent. And those Flaws are blown out of proportion.
(Needs admin rights to do Sh*t which is pretty complicated to pull out and needs different development of hack for each specific MB it is supposed to hack. => High failure rate, more likely bricked Mobo than successful infection of BIOS.)
Secondly they demonstrated that they did modify string in BIOS which booted. Sorry, people do that daily. They did not demonstrate ability to run custom code. I mean, people modified/removed parts of intel's IME firmware. That means they successfully pulled very thing those guys blamed AMD for having somewhat possible. But in contrast did not show that they were able to do it.
So, why the hell would someone be kind to intel and bash AMD at same time? If I would like to bash AMD, I would have to declare war on intel to keep it proportional.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 10336
Joined: 2014-07-21
Now I'm curious if they'll be able to push the rudimentary 5% improvement even though their patches cost them 5% of power right now. Upgrade to get last year's performance at the time when last year's CPU was released doesn't sound very tempting at all...