Intel gags benchmarks via license in latest microcode fixes,Debian says Nope.avi - Sensationalist Headlines

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/08/21/intel_cpu_patch_licence/ If the newest CPU security vulnerabilities were not bad PR fire enough, Intel stokes the flames a bit more. The blog mentioned in the article at the bottom says it best: So, lots of people are interested in the speed penalty incurred in the microcode fixes, and Intel has now attempted to gag anyone who would collect information for reporting about those penalties, through a restriction in their license. Bad move. The correct way to handle security problems is to own up to the damage, publish mitigations, and make it possible for your customers to get along. Hiding how they are damaged is unacceptable. Silencing free speech by those who would merely publish benchmarks? Bad business. Customers can’t trust your components when you do that.

Intel is one of the scummiest companies on the planet.

So glad I've moved back to AMD

I've always used Intel because it always has worked for me, but I'm thinking about switching to AMD myself. What is the AMD equivalent for an I7 or better?

Benchmarks will come out anyway shortly after, why even bother with the legal charade?

I'm pretty sure that's not an Intel chip in the stock photo but an AMD one, Intel CPUs use an LGA (Land Grid Array) socket which means that the chip itself is composed of flat contacts that contact pins in the motherboard socket. AMD chips and very, very old Intel chips use PGA sockets like the one in the photo, where the CPU has pins that are pushed through holes in the socket. Not like that matters at all to the story but I think that's kind of amusing I guess

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

I can’t wait until I have enough money to buy a new mobo and amd cpu. Intel processors are good, I just like not having to buy a new fucking motherboard everytime I want to upgrade.

Probably to prevent tech journalists from publishing them. The less people hear about it, the easier it is for them to sweep it under the rug.

Depends on the specific i7 you're thinking about. I'm currently using an R7 2700X, which is ~20-30% faster in multithreaded tasks compared to an i7 8700K while it costs about 70USD less (also counting the cost of an equivalent cooler included with the R7, which is really quite good), but it's also around 10-20% slower than it in tasks dependent on good single core performance / high IPC, though, I.E most current games.

The issue with this question is that Intel's product lineup is insanely bloated and confusing. For fuck's sake, the Core i7 lineup still includes dual-core CPUs at the low end, going all the way up 6-core hyperthreaded beasts. Desktop i7s have direct competitors in both the Ryzen 5 and 7 lineups, it just depends on how many cores you want. Hyperthreading is standard on all Ryzen 5 and 7 CPUs, doubling the logical thread count per core.

Whenever I'd talked to their reps in-person they've been pretty great. Their CEO, Dr Lisa Su, is fantastic because she's actually worked "in the trenches" so to speak, on semiconductor design, and subsequently I think can lead a company like AMD far better than the suits of Intel.

Until AMD can compete with Intel in single core clock speeds, OR programs and games get better multi-core utilization, I (and I'm sure many others) are going to continue using their products.

I just wish that there were more Ryzen laptops. If there was something along the lines of a Dell XPS but with a R7 2700U I’d buy the shit out of it.

Are you stuck in 2010 or what? While AMD's IPC is still not as good as Intel it is more than enough for most tasks. (including gaming)

No, its the manner of games I play (Hearts of Iron 3, Arma). They all run WAAAAY better with higher clock speeds, adding more cores isn't going to help. If it's good enough for you, cool, it isn't for me.

HP puts out a slim elitebook with the Pro 2700U. I almost got it instead of the Latitude with it but the keyboard was worse.

Ryzen is competitive with Coffee Lake in single-threaded tasks to within 5% margin, controlled for price.

"nope.avi"? Didn't realize 2010 hadn't passed yet.

Can confirm I play a shitload of modded paradox games on my HTPC with a 1600 and have zero problems. It's not even overclocked due to form factor.

Also, when it comes to clock speed, Ryzen has some advantages in its turbo boosting algorithm over Intel's that really narrow the gap as long as you've got the cooling grunt and power stability to back it up. (That said, it takes less kindly to manual overclocking than Intel does, and tends to hit a thermal wall at around 4.5 GHz)

That's with good reason. The number of cores on the CPU is dependant on yield. If some cores are dead after fab, they then lock them down and sell it as 2 cores or 4 cores instead of 6. Due to complexity of these CPUs, the yields on a complete / perfect one probibly isn't that amazing.

You're playing everything on their new games. Clausewitz for HoI3 and M&T are completely different things. ARMA has always run poorly with more cores and less clock speeds vs. higher clocks. I don't know what to tell you, stop trying to dictate what you find good enough is acceptable for me.

I'm not positive how it is now with 2/4/6c consumer parts, but prior to Coffee Lake there are actually 2 templates, a dual and quad core. Those are binned respectively amongst Celeron/Pentium/i3 and i5/i7/e3

I understand binning. AMD has the right idea with binning, instead of making their product lineups confusing, they sell core-disabled higher-tier products as lower-tier products. If I remember correctly, some Ryzen 5 2600's are Ryzen 7 2700's with two cores disabled.

It's not just a matter of being anti-consumer either, they make incredible feats of engineering like the intel edison that are universally higher performance and consume less power than their competition and they have their own staff on their own forums apologizing for the state of their documentation because they've fixed errors in it but someone won't update the version on their website. So then they just dump the product and leave people developing using it panicking and extremely concerned that any intel product could just be discontinued at a moment's notice like how they screwed over people with the realsense.

Thats cool. I never said I played those, you just don't seem to understand that I'm not playing the games you listed. If it works for you IN THE GAMES I DO NOT PLAY that's great. If you think you know better than the guys developing the mod for EU4 (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/meiuo-taxes-performance.1103459/#post-24330529) and the developers for HoI3 (http://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/lets-talk-multi-threading.417943/#post-9965345) for the past few years too, okay, you can think that as well. https://www.reddit.com/r/MEIOUandTaxes/comments/68bpk4/improving_performance/dh4ce30/

I don't see Ryzen mentioned anywhere in that Reddit thread, only a lack of support for multi-threading, and I'm not going to register for that forum just to view the posts. As I've already said, Ryzen is competitive with Intel in single-threaded workloads to within 5%.

ARMA's a pretty bad example considering it runs pretty poorly no matter what kind of system you use

Stop shitting up the thread with your shoddy defence tactics that relate nothing to the topic on hand and then wave it off as nothing, they've provided arguements and facts based upon ryzen's performance and it is within 5% of margin with single core performance. Ryzen 2nd Gen is as good, and even better than Intel's current line, why do you think Intel's been shitting themselves over the course of the last few months? As for the actual topic, saw this coming by a mile, Intel has been pushing a lot of sneeky shit into their microcode updates for years, surprised this is the one that broke the camels back. Its a bit like their intentional sabotage of performance if you compiled anything with the Intel compiler a few years back and tried to run it through an AMD system, it'd intentionally compile in complex dumby blocks that impacted AMD performance but Intel CPUs were designed to ignore it via a microcode update. Between penny pinching by replacing IHS solder to low quality cheapo thermal compound, nickle and diming the customer by marking up their products astronomically and then trying to sweap their design flaws under the rug like it never happened instead of owning up to it (something which their competitor AMD has done before when they've fucked up on security and performance, good old Bulldozer days, they owned up to its poor performance due to engineering and corperate issues resulting in it being pushed out far sooner than it should have been), Intel are one of the scummiest and anti-competitive companies within the hardware industry, they're right up there with Nvidia with their shitty practices.