gigaxtreme1
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2002
- Messages
- 3,577
So my understanding is that the patch bricks systems up to Phenom II? AM3 and before?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I like how they try to blame this on 10 year old documentation. Hey idiots, how about DON'T APPLY A PATCH TO HARDWARE THAT DOESN'T NEED IT.
Intel: "Oops, we goofed, try this. Its no big deal, not our fault blahblahblah here have a cookie."
AMD: "We don't need this, lol."
Microsoft: "Hold my beer."
AMD please sue both these retards and win. Knowingly using defective or untested work from one vendor and allowing it to damage that vendor's competitor is pretty blatant.
10 year old spec is the problem? Funny, the processors worked fine 10 years ago. Somebody misread the spec or didn't bother to test. MS is liable.
This patch applies to spectre, a variant which some AMD chips are susceptible to. The issue is that they changed something that (according to them) the documentation said wouldn't cause any problems (or at least, didn't explicitly say it would cause problems). Turns out it did. It could be that they overlooked something, or it may have actually been omitted from the documentation. Either way, Microsoft managed to botch an update again. Nothing out of the ordinary here.I like how they try to blame this on 10 year old documentation. Hey idiots, how about DON'T APPLY A PATCH TO HARDWARE THAT DOESN'T NEED IT.
Intel: "Oops, we goofed, try this. Its no big deal, not our fault blahblahblah here have a cookie."
AMD: "We don't need this, lol."
Microsoft: "Hold my beer."
AMD please sue both these retards and win. Knowingly using defective or untested work from one vendor and allowing it to damage that vendor's competitor is pretty blatant.
This patch applies to spectre, a variant which some AMD chips are susceptible to. The issue is that they changed something that (according to them) the documentation said wouldn't cause any problems (or at least, didn't explicitly say it would cause problems). Turns out it did. It could be that they overlooked something, or it may have actually been omitted from the documentation. Either way, Microsoft managed to botch an update again. Nothing out of the ordinary here.
Thanks for the clarification, although what I said wasn't exactly wrong...doesn't hurt to be specific.All AMD chips back to K6 are exploitable by Spectre. Every single OOO design from any vendor.
Nice Job MS/Intel.
I wonder how much Intel paid Microsoft for that "blunder".
Microsoft has received reports of some AMD devices getting into an unbootable state after installation of recent Windows operating system security updates. After investigating, Microsoft determined that some AMD chipsets do not conform to the documentation previously provided to Microsoft to develop the Windows operating system mitigations to protect against the chipset vulnerabilities known as Spectre and Meltdown
Both AMD and Microsoft are at fault. AMD should have provided accurate documentation, Microsoft should have tested the patches before releasing them (either themselves, through partners like AMD, or via beta channels).
On hardware that old? Yikes.Both AMD and Microsoft are at fault. AMD should have provided accurate documentation, Microsoft should have tested the patches before releasing them (either themselves, through partners like AMD, or via beta channels).
If Microsoft and AMD care about it, then yes. Otherwise, is it that big a deal? I don't think so, but then I don't run mission critical software on my PC.On hardware that old? Yikes.
So compatibility goes out the window because of spectre but we are still on x86 / x64 why? Give me a break.
Both AMD and Microsoft are at fault. AMD should have provided accurate documentation, Microsoft should have tested the patches before releasing them (either themselves, through partners like AMD, or via beta channels).
They just both need to get act together and fix the issue before becomes more of a major headache.Ok, AMD fault is providing incorrect documentation to Microsoft; whereas Microsoft fault was to trust AMD in this.
The Verge sees this as typical buck passing, however, there is in the quote below from poster "Reflex" there about noted poor documentation of chipset work in previous generations. Go to excuse and buck passing? You be the judge.Ok, AMD fault is providing incorrect documentation to Microsoft; whereas Microsoft fault was to trust AMD in this.
They just both need to get act together and fix the issue before becomes more of a major headache.
Update: AMD has released the following statement about the issue. "AMD is aware of an issue with some older generation processors following installation of a Microsoft security update that was published over the weekend. AMD and Microsoft have been working on an update to resolve the issue and expect it to begin rolling out again for these impacted shortly."
That is good to hear. I really always liked AMD as a company.
intel only pays gaming companies.I wonder how much Intel paid Microsoft for that "blunder".