Major Intel CPU vulnerability
-
@momurda said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
Ludicrous that the fixes are still under NDA, with comments in the fix redacted.
yeah, how is that possible? Is the US gov't hiding this?
-
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@scottalanmiller said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This year has really shown that Intel has no idea what they are doing. Time to get to AMD and ARM procs and stay there.
Windows licensing isn't favorable to AMD
Intel procs just doubled in price compared to AMD, Windows might be a lot better on AMD today than before.
-
@scottalanmiller it was a response about how everyone is vulnerable to this issue. Microsoft licensing is simplified once you go "Datacenter".
You just need stupidly deep pockets.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@scottalanmiller it was a response about how everyone is vulnerable to this issue. Microsoft licensing is simplified once you go "Datacenter".
You just need stupidly deep pockets.
It's not simplified, though, it's just cheaper past 13VMs. At 12 VMs, Standard is still better. DC still has all the core counting complexity of other versions. DC is just as simple as Standard.
-
Does AMD have a sixteen core server proc released yet? If so, Windows on AMD just became the go to solution.
-
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@scottalanmiller said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This year has really shown that Intel has no idea what they are doing. Time to get to AMD and ARM procs and stay there.
Windows licensing isn't favorable to AMD
Actually, it's PERFECT for AMD now. It's more favourable for AMD than for Intel by a long shot (as of today.) AMD Epyc 16 core single proc is now nearly double the performance of the Intel counterpart (or half the cost, however you want to look at it) with the same Windows licensing.
-
A base Windows license core count is sixteen. So dual proc EPYC 7251 or single proc 7281, 7301, 7351, or 7351P procs incur no Windows licensing penalties.
-
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
You can plan for patching and maintenance. You cannot plan for unexpectedly losing resources. Can you imagine how many cloud providers this is going to affect. They share so many services across so many servers, I doubt they could afford to take a 30% resource hit. It could take down their whole environment.
-
@irj That is why the Linux Kernel dev team was passionately referring to this issue as FUCKWIT aka Forcefully Unmap Complete Kernel With Interrupt Trampolines.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This year has really shown that Intel has no idea what they are doing. Time to get to AMD and ARM procs and stay there.
ARM's impacted.
-
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
You can plan for patching and maintenance. You cannot plan for unexpectedly losing resources. Can you imagine how many cloud providers this is going to affect. They share so many services across so many servers, I doubt they could afford to take a 30% resource hit. It could take down their whole environment.
No, It's @#%@% amazing for AWS. They can charge customers 30% more for the same amount of computing power. SaaS providers might get screwed, but they can also just pass this on to customers as a 10% cost increase and call it a day. On-Prem datacenters, this is potentially good (It's forcing people to run denser who were not coming close to the limit). people close to the limit will just have to order gear.
-
Even before Ryzen, I have always thought AMD to be a good bang for the buck in the desktop market. Unless you had the need for the extra horsepower from the better Intel chips you could get better bang for the buck from AMD.
-
@storageninja said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
You can plan for patching and maintenance. You cannot plan for unexpectedly losing resources. Can you imagine how many cloud providers this is going to affect. They share so many services across so many servers, I doubt they could afford to take a 30% resource hit. It could take down their whole environment.
No, It's @#%@% amazing for AWS. They can charge customers 30% more for the same amount of computing power. SaaS providers might get screwed, but they can also just pass this on to customers as a 10% cost increase and call it a day. On-Prem datacenters, this is potentially good (It's forcing people to run denser who were not coming close to the limit). people close to the limit will just have to order gear.
Getting people to pay more or buy new hardware across the board is anything, but easy...
-
@penguinwrangler said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
Even before Ryzen, I have always thought AMD to be a good bang for the buck in the desktop market. Unless you had the need for the extra horsepower from the better Intel chips you could get better bang for the buck from AMD.
Desktop lacks the licensing complications of the server size. For desktops, before this AMD was still great. But this gives it a HUGE incentive on servers, too!
-
@storageninja said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@scottalanmiller said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This year has really shown that Intel has no idea what they are doing. Time to get to AMD and ARM procs and stay there.
ARM's impacted.
How is ARM impacted?
-
@storageninja said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
On-Prem datacenters, this is potentially good (It's forcing people to run denser who were not coming close to the limit). people close to the limit will just have to order gear.
Uh what? Potentially good. Even of you have the extra resources, you paid for them. So how can this be potentially good to lose them?
-
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@storageninja said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
On-Prem datacenters, this is potentially good (It's forcing people to run denser who were not coming close to the limit). people close to the limit will just have to order gear.
Uh what? Potentially good. Even of you have the extra resources, you paid for them. So how can this be potentially good to lose them?
It teaches the on-prem staff to learn how to build their systems appropriately.
-
@dustinb3403 said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@storageninja said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
On-Prem datacenters, this is potentially good (It's forcing people to run denser who were not coming close to the limit). people close to the limit will just have to order gear.
Uh what? Potentially good. Even of you have the extra resources, you paid for them. So how can this be potentially good to lose them?
It teaches the on-prem staff to learn how to build their systems appropriately.
That's like saying me taking 30% of your paycheck teaches you to spend your money appropriately and not be wasteful..
-
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@dustinb3403 said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@storageninja said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@irj said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
This might be the worst vulnerability we've seen to date...
On-Prem datacenters, this is potentially good (It's forcing people to run denser who were not coming close to the limit). people close to the limit will just have to order gear.
Uh what? Potentially good. Even of you have the extra resources, you paid for them. So how can this be potentially good to lose them?
It teaches the on-prem staff to learn how to build their systems appropriately.
That's like saying me taking 30% of your paycheck teaches you to spend your money appropriately and not be wasteful..
I might try that.... give m 30% of your paycheck!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
@penguinwrangler said in Major Intel CPU vulnerability:
Even before Ryzen, I have always thought AMD to be a good bang for the buck in the desktop market. Unless you had the need for the extra horsepower from the better Intel chips you could get better bang for the buck from AMD.
Desktop lacks the licensing complications of the server size. For desktops, before this AMD was still great. But this gives it a HUGE incentive on servers, too!
I realized that just pointing out the desktop part too. Honestly why go with a Microsoft server the complexity they add with their licensing is reason enough to avoid them. So many ways to offer functions you get with Microsoft servers with Linux.
