Intel 10nm/7nm CPU/GPU Rumor Thread : Cannonlake, Icelake, Tigerlake, Sapphire Rapids, etc.

limitedaccess

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
7,594
Do we have any idea if Icelake will have any hardware fixes for Meltdown and Spectre? Internally they've known about it for some time.

It depends on the context of what you mean by hardware fix.

Meltdown could be fixed.

Spectre cannot be fixed in hardware anytime soon. Further mitigation and performance loss mitigation possibly.
 

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,804
Do we have any idea if Icelake will have any hardware fixes for Meltdown and Spectre? Internally they've known about it for some time.

My guess is that those issues will require about a decade to be fixed. Current patches for spectre only mitigate the problem, but don't fully solve it. A complete solution will require a complete rethinking of how CPUs are made.
 

Hagrid

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
9,149
My guess is that those issues will require about a decade to be fixed. Current patches for spectre only mitigate the problem, but don't fully solve it. A complete solution will require a complete rethinking of how CPUs are made.
So the new cpu's will have the slowdown! Not a huge deal on gamers rigs but bad for the others that it affects much more.
 

Ultima99

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 31, 2004
Messages
4,905
My guess is that those issues will require about a decade to be fixed. Current patches for spectre only mitigate the problem, but don't fully solve it. A complete solution will require a complete rethinking of how CPUs are made.
A decade seems a bit long, even for Intel. I would think that by time we see Sapphire Rapids they should have had enough time.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
Meltdown should be fixed before the end of 2019. I don't think Spectre can be totally fixed any time soon.

We are likely going to hear about OOO issues for the next decade from all vendors. Perhaps multiple decades.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
We are likely going to hear about OOO issues for the next decade from all vendors. Perhaps multiple decades.

You been on vacation for awhile, Intel says they will have it fixed in the hardware this year.
 

Rakanoth

n00b
Joined
Oct 6, 2017
Messages
48
Will we ever see CPU parts smaller than 2-3nm? What kind of innovation are they planning to increase performance in the future?
 

Dayman

Gawd
Joined
Jul 12, 2017
Messages
605
Will we ever see CPU parts smaller than 2-3nm? What kind of innovation are they planning to increase performance in the future?
ylHBDgx.png


This is likely a small subset of what they are researching for future nodes, but I imagine it is likely that Intel will make use of EUV at 7nm, they say they also want to move away from Silicon at 7nm, so that would mean III-V Transistors.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
Intel says they will have it fixed in the hardware this year.

The Icelake fixes will only bandaid the current OOO issue. The top of the iceberg is barely uncovered for OOO flaws.

There is a reason why every single CPU manufactor making OOO designs is hit.

You been on vacation for awhile

Yes someone got angry that AMDs lies got uncovered ;)
 
Last edited:

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
The Icelake fixes will only bandaid the current OOO issue. The top of the iceberg is barely uncovered for OOO flaws.

There is a reason why every single CPU manufactor making OOO designs is hit.

I think you lack the education to make that statement and the knowledge of what Intel plans to do. This whole Intel patch thing has been a disaster to the point our IT is looking to switch our servers to Epyc, from what I hear multiple municipality's are looking to get in on the quote. I like how you try to spread the nightmare tho.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
I think you lack the education to make that statement and the knowledge of what Intel plans to do. This whole Intel patch thing has been a disaster to the point our IT is looking to switch our servers to Epyc, from what I hear multiple municipality's are looking to get in on the quote. I like how you try to spread the nightmare tho.

EPYC is even more broken, so good luck with that idea not to mention all the other issues. Just as all your previous hopes about sales that never materialized, this is another in that long endless line.

And for the other part I think you need to do some basic research. Some of us run datacenters, you clearly dont ;)
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
EPYC is even more broken, so good luck with that idea not to mention all the other issues. Just as all your previous hopes about sales that never materialized, this is another in that long endless line.

And for the other part I think you need to do some basic research. Some of us run datacenters, you clearly dont ;)

I like how you just say stuff and think it's fact, prove a issue with Epyc otherwise your just talking out your ass. See they installed the patches here and our network is running extremely poorly now, so I have first hand experience with just how bad it sucks. Our servers are now at 90% cpu usage, that is not good as it's causing all kinds of slowdowns. That is reality and not your fiction.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
ylHBDgx.png


This is likely a small subset of what they are researching for future nodes, but I imagine it is likely that Intel will make use of EUV at 7nm, they say they also want to move away from Silicon at 7nm, so that would mean III-V Transistors.


I dont think we will see 3nm, I think 5nm will be the end for at least a decade or so.
 

Hagrid

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
9,149
I like how you just say stuff and think it's fact, prove a issue with Epyc otherwise your just talking out your ass. See they installed the patches here and our network is running extremely poorly now, so I have first hand experience with just how bad it sucks. Our servers are now at 90% cpu usage, that is not good as it's causing all kinds of slowdowns. That is reality and not your fiction.
He can't do anything other that say everything Intel is great and works fine. The fiasco that is happening with Intels chips? No biggy, it won't hurt nothing. I have 0 respect for him and maybe others think the same. Truly sad.

I was hoping for some 7nm stuff soon! I am itching to upgrade to something. Either brand will be fine.
 

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,804
I like how you just say stuff and think it's fact, prove a issue with Epyc otherwise your just talking out your ass. See they installed the patches here and our network is running extremely poorly now, so I have first hand experience with just how bad it sucks. Our servers are now at 90% cpu usage, that is not good as it's causing all kinds of slowdowns. That is reality and not your fiction.

What is the performance hit of the patches on EPYC?
 

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,804

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
A simple "I have no idea" was enough. Unlike you and unlike ARS authors, I have seen performance impact on EPYC and other Zen systems after the patches.

I am not the one testing Epyc, all they told me was it far less of a impact, cant tell you what I dont know, the IT guys are the ones playing with the Epyc server. I just run the Fleet department and I talk to the head of IT. I will take what he tells me far more seriously then whatever BS you want to spew. As far as hard numbers I have only seen Intel server ones and it's pretty ugly, even worse when it decides to reboot itself as well.
 

Shintai

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 1, 2016
Messages
5,678
I am not the one testing Epyc, all they told me was it far less of a impact, cant tell you what I dont know, the IT guys are the ones playing with the Epyc server. I just run the Fleet department and I talk to the head of IT. I will take what he tells me far more seriously then whatever BS you want to spew. As far as hard numbers I have only seen Intel server ones and it's pretty ugly, even worse when it decides to reboot itself as well.

So you have no clue as juanrga said and you say other people spread BS? :)
 

face2palm

Gawd
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
578
I am not the one testing Epyc, all they told me was it far less of a impact, cant tell you what I dont know, the IT guys are the ones playing with the Epyc server. I just run the Fleet department and I talk to the head of IT. I will take what he tells me far more seriously then whatever BS you want to spew. As far as hard numbers I have only seen Intel server ones and it's pretty ugly, even worse when it decides to reboot itself as well.

2nd hand knowledge is best knowledge.

So you "cant tell what you dont know" but that didn't stop you from trying.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
2nd hand knowledge is best knowledge.

So you "cant tell what you dont know" but that didn't stop you from trying.

It's more knowledge then you guys on the subject. Or shall we go over everything Shintai and Juranga get wrong all the time then try to ninja edit it away. Simple fact is the IT department head said it's less of a issue on Epyc and it's been a nightmare since patching the Intel stuff, simple facts. I never claimed to know hard numbers unlike the two that get stuff wrong all the time... but are in the know. But your good with Shintai posting Epyc is flawed with 0 evidence or proof, long as Intel looks good right? Since the patches our network at the city has gone to crap and the server load is insane now, that is a fact. Were hardly unique in this fact as many are having similar issues. Our IT department has 100 million to upgrade the system and right now they are leaning to Epyc, it's his call not mine. Glad you could add nothing to the conversation tho.
 

juanrga

2[H]4U
Joined
Feb 22, 2017
Messages
2,804
I am not the one testing Epyc, all they told me was it far less of a impact, cant tell you what I dont know, the IT guys are the ones playing with the Epyc server. I just run the Fleet department and I talk to the head of IT. I will take what he tells me far more seriously then whatever BS you want to spew. As far as hard numbers I have only seen Intel server ones and it's pretty ugly, even worse when it decides to reboot itself as well.

It's more knowledge then you guys on the subject. Or shall we go over everything Shintai and Juranga get wrong all the time then try to ninja edit it away. Simple fact is the IT department head said it's less of a issue on Epyc and it's been a nightmare since patching the Intel stuff, simple facts. I never claimed to know hard numbers unlike the two that get stuff wrong all the time... but are in the know. But your good with Shintai posting Epyc is flawed with 0 evidence or proof, long as Intel looks good right? Since the patches our network at the city has gone to crap and the server load is insane now, that is a fact. Were hardly unique in this fact as many are having similar issues. Our IT department has 100 million to upgrade the system and right now they are leaning to Epyc, it's his call not mine. Glad you could add nothing to the conversation tho.

Meanwhile in real world...

AMD's efforts to prevent and address security vulnerabilities can be costly and may be partially effective or not successful at all. For instance, AMD's mitigation efforts, including the deployment of software or firmware updates to address security vulnerabilities, could result in unintended consequences such as adverse performance system operation issues and reboots. AMD may also depend on third parties, such as customers, vendors and end users to deploy AMD's mitigations or create their own, and they may delay, decline or modify the implementation of such mitigations. AMD's relationships with its customers could be adversely affected as some of its customers may stop purchasing AMD products, reduce or delay future purchases of AMD products, or use competing products. Any of these actions by AMD's customers could adversely affect its revenue. AMD is also subject to claims related to the recently disclosed side-channel exploits, such as "Spectre" and "Meltdown," and may face claims or litigation for future vulnerabilities. Actual or perceived security vulnerabilities of AMD products may subject AMD to adverse publicity, damage to its brand and reputation, and could materially harm AMD's business or financial results

:smuggrin:
 

Hagrid

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
9,149
Meanwhile in real world...



:smuggrin:
Sounds bad for AMD. So it must be 1000x worse for Intel since they not only have all the bugs, CEO selling stock before, and announcing this to China before it all even came out. Not a big deal, just want CPU's to get better.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,025
Meanwhile in real world...



:smuggrin:

I love the fact you want to quote something but not show the source like I do. Sounds like a lawyer wrote that. If you think lawyers and reality are even close then you my friend have lost all your marbles....
 

Dermac

Limp Gawd
Joined
May 6, 2005
Messages
152
So Juan, who told you this?

"AMD's efforts to prevent and address security vulnerabilities can be costly and may be partially effective or not successful at all. For instance, AMD's mitigation efforts, including the deployment of software or firmware updates to address security vulnerabilities, could result in unintended consequences such as adverse performance system operation issues and reboots. AMD may also depend on third parties, such as customers, vendors and end users to deploy AMD's mitigations or create their own, and they may delay, decline or modify the implementation of such mitigations. AMD's relationships with its customers could be adversely affected as some of its customers may stop purchasing AMD products, reduce or delay future purchases of AMD products, or use competing products. Any of these actions by AMD's customers could adversely affect its revenue. AMD is also subject to claims related to the recently disclosed side-channel exploits, such as "Spectre" and "Meltdown," and may face claims or litigation for future vulnerabilities. Actual or perceived security vulnerabilities of AMD products may subject AMD to adverse publicity, damage to its brand and reputation, and could materially harm AMD's business or financial results"

As Gideon requested, is there actually a source for this or is this some more copy pasta from another random forum? Also, couldn't you just replace all the times it says AMD with Intel and the statement is also true? Also, is there punctuation to end that last sentence or does it continue on? If so, why not include the whole quote? Is the source for this statement some sort of state secret, like "I could tell you but then I would have to kill you." sort of thing?
 

drescherjm

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
14,938
I would vote it has a lot of relevance. AMD wrote this. Although it may have been their lawyers involved in the wording.
 

Hagrid

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Nov 23, 2006
Messages
9,149
I would vote it has a lot of relevance. AMD wrote this. Although it may have been their lawyers involved in the wording.
That is mean, so you are saying he is dumb!? ;)

Long as they stay in business it can say whatever it wants.
 

Dayman

Gawd
Joined
Jul 12, 2017
Messages
605
I would vote it has a lot of relevance. AMD wrote this. Although it may have been their lawyers involved in the wording.

I know they wrote it! :p I am wondering why it is relevant to this thread! Is it due to the architectural hardening against Spectre that the Zen 2 core will have?
 
Top