this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

45745 readers
94 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] exanime@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (3 children)

But isn't the fix basically under clocking those CPU?

Meaning the "solution" (not even out yet) is creeping those units before the flaw creeples them?

[–] Kazumara@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (1 children)

They said the cause was a bug in the microcode making the CPU request unsafe voltages:

Our analysis of returned processors confirms that the elevated operating voltage is stemming from a microcode algorithm resulting in incorrect voltage requests to the processor.

If the buggy behaviour of the voltage contributed to higher boosts, then the fix will cost some performance. But if the clocks were steered separately from the voltage, and the boost clock is still achieved without the overly high voltage, then it might be performance neutral.

I think we will know for sure soon, multiple reviewers announced they were planning to test the impact.

[–] exanime@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

Thanks for the clarification

[–] msage@programming.dev 0 points 3 months ago

Remember Spectre? When they recommended disabling hyperthreading?

[–] w2tpmf@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That was the first "Intel Baseline Profile" they rolled out to mobo manufacturers earlier in the year. They've roll out a new fix now.

[–] Retrograde@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

As an i9-13900k owner, thanks. My chip has been great so far, better update when I get home