Intel Stops Development, Deployment of Spectre Microcode Update for Several CPU Families

[trparky]

The 2004 ford ranger is 15 years old, yet ford still recalled them to replace airbags.

Yes, but a car tends to cost a hell of a lot more than a computer.

5 years should be the bare MINIMUM for support of any kind, 10 years is getting closer.

I agree on the five years part but ten years? Oh come now, that's pushing it. Cheap computers can be had for really cheap these days. I live in the United States so a quick trip to say... Walmart will get you not the greatest system but it will at least get you upgraded to something newer than a Core 2 Duo which if you ask me it's a wonder how the hell it still works for today's demanding Internet. Going to CNN or Fox News alone will bring that Core 2 Duo to its knees considering just how much crap is loaded on those sites. And YouTube? Good luck with that. You're gonna to need it. Facebook? That site will positively put the knife into that Core 2 Duo system.

 

[TheDeeGee]

Can they atleast hand out free stickers then for affected systems, saying: "Spectre Inside" ?

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Yes, but a car tends to cost a hell of a lot more than a computer.

I agree on the five years part but ten years? Oh come now, that's pushing it. Cheap computers can be had for really cheap these days. I live in the United States so a quick trip to say... Walmart will get you not the greatest system but it will at least get you upgraded to something newer than a Core 2 Duo which if you ask me it's a wonder how the hell it still works for today's demanding Internet. Going to CNN or Fox News alone will bring that Core 2 Duo to its knees considering just how much crap is loaded on those sites. And YouTube? Good luck with that. You're gonna to need it. Facebook? That site will positively put the knife into that Core 2 Duo system.

The F*** do you put on your systems?

My work system is a first gen core 2 duo. Just tried every site you listed, no issues here. Of course, I use an adblocker, so I dont have to deal with worthless advertising.

Perhaps stop visiting sites while your browser is loaded up with malware?

 

[trparky]

Any Javascript-heavy web site is going to bring a system that old to its knees. I dare you, open up Task Manager and look at the CPU usage spike very badly as you load those sites meanwhile my newer processor looks at the job its handed and practically yawns and says "Is that all you got?"

 

[hat]

Any Javascript-heavy web site is going to bring a system that old to its knees. I dare you, open up Task Manager and look at the CPU usage spike very badly as you load those sites meanwhile my newer processor looks at the job its handed and practically yawns and says "Is that all you got?"

Congrats on your shiny new processor. The point you seem to be missing is that there's a lot of these systems still in service, and now they're vulnerable forever.

 

[trparky]

What I'm saying is how do you even get any work done when your system's CPU usage spikes that badly? Any time your system's CPU usage spikes that badly is when overall system performance is going to take a major shit. That means everything from a longer time for you the launch programs, a longer time for the Start Menu to appear, and just about everything having that sluggish feeling. And we're not even talking about how in most corporate environments the security software alone is hogging a majority of the computing capacity. Throw the Microsoft Windows patch into the mix and... good God.

 

[windwhirl]

What I'm saying is how do you even get any work done when your system's CPU usage spikes that badly? Any time your system's CPU usage spikes that badly is when overall system performance is going to take a major shit. That means everything from a longer time for you the launch programs, a longer time for the Start Menu to appear, and just about everything having that sluggish feeling. And we're not even talking about how in most corporate environments the security software alone is hogging a majority of the computing capacity. Throw the Microsoft Windows patch into the mix and... good God.

Not all kinds of workloads need the same amount of computing power to be done. At work we used to have (until it broke around a year and half ago) an AMD system from 2005, I think it was a single core Athlon XP or something like that, which we used for tax filing and accounting, along with browsing through government websites (using Chrome, of all things) and Excel spreadsheets. And it worked fine.

 

[Assimilator]

Did you actually look at the source links that are on the piece, or just chose to skip them?

Edit1: In case you were only looking through Forum view, look at the piece through the main news interface, and you'll see the links and sources.

My bad, I apologise. It's pretty annoying that the "site view" and "forum view" are different.

Age is irrelevant.

They sold the CPUs, the CPUs are still in widespread use, the CPUs have a design flaw that needs correcting.

Intel are basically giving AMD free marketing here lol.

Yeah, because the number of people with decade-old systems make up the vast majority of the consumer market and have such massive buying power.

The 2004 ford ranger is 15 years old, yet ford still recalled them to replace airbags. Putting a bit of code into a windows update doesn't require nearly as much work. What excuse does intel have other then trying to squeeze more money out of people and being lazy?

Processors are not operating systems. If there is a hardware vulnerability, it needs to be patched. Especially for things like the core 2, which is still widely used and represents a large attack surface.

Not everyone is on the "replace hardware every 2 years' train. 5 years should be the bare MINIMUM for support of any kind, 10 years is getting closer. There is just no need to stop supporting old hardware when it still works.

Las time I checked, a processor flaw isn't liable to kill people. And if you're still using a Core 2 for anything serious... best of luck to you.

 

[trparky]

Not all kinds of workloads need the same amount of computing power to be done.

But in most business environments time equals money. Slower computers means slower, less productive employees, which of course means more wasted money.

 

[R-T-B]

The 2004 ford ranger is 15 years old, yet ford still recalled them to replace airbags. Putting a bit of code into a windows update doesn't require nearly as much work. What excuse does intel have other then trying to squeeze more money out of people and being lazy?

You are ignoring two critical differences.

1.) Cars typically have longer lifecycles than CPUs.

2.) No one is going to die directly as a result of Spectre like defective airbags.

 

[Hood]

Yes, I understand that but that's because the microcode update for anything but 6th generation and newer hasn't been released yet. When Intel does, Microsoft will get it and all Windows systems will get it.

That's not how I understand it. Intel said the Haswell microcode update (for Spectre 2) has been given to board partners, and would be available to consumers when a new BIOS is released by those partners (Asus, Gigabyte, Asrock, etc.). That's why I posted here, to get clarification on this delay. (see post #17)EDIT - Never mind, I just saw this - https://www.pcper.com/news/General-...ectre-V2-We-predict-your-tastes-will-branch-o

 

[hat]

What I'm saying is how do you even get any work done when your system's CPU usage spikes that badly? Any time your system's CPU usage spikes that badly is when overall system performance is going to take a major shit. That means everything from a longer time for you the launch programs, a longer time for the Start Menu to appear, and just about everything having that sluggish feeling. And we're not even talking about how in most corporate environments the security software alone is hogging a majority of the computing capacity. Throw the Microsoft Windows patch into the mix and... good God.

But in most business environments time equals money. Slower computers means slower, less productive employees, which of course means more wasted money.

What he said:

Not all kinds of workloads need the same amount of computing power to be done. At work we used to have (until it broke around a year and half ago) an AMD system from 2005, I think it was a single core Athlon XP or something like that, which we used for tax filing and accounting, along with browsing through government websites (using Chrome, of all things) and Excel spreadsheets. And it worked fine.

At my job, we have maybe 10 shitty thin client type computers scattered around the plant. They are most assuredly some years old, slow, and out of date... but it's fast enough to do what they're meant for, which is basically reporting production, printing labels, keeping track of inventory, etc... I don't think the boss would want to replace them all with shiny new Ice Lake based thin clients because they're not Spectre/Meltdown-proof. All workloads are not created equal and simple applications don't necessarily benefit from new hardware.

 

[trparky]

If you look in C:\Windows\System32 you'll find two files that start with mcupdate, that's the microcode update file.

 

[INSTG8R]

That's not how I understand it. Intel said the Haswell microcode update (for Spectre 2) has been given to board partners, and would be available to consumers when a new BIOS is released by those partners (Asus, Gigabyte, Asrock, etc.). That's why I posted here, to get clarification on this delay. (see post #17)EDIT - Never mind, I just saw this - https://www.pcper.com/news/General-...ectre-V2-We-predict-your-tastes-will-branch-o

I’m not holding my breath we are gonna see new BIOS for our boards...

 

[Solaris17]

The 2004 ford ranger is 15 years old, yet ford still recalled them to replace airbags. Putting a bit of code into a windows update doesn't require nearly as much work. What excuse does intel have other then trying to squeeze more money out of people and being lazy?

Processors are not operating systems. If there is a hardware vulnerability, it needs to be patched. Especially for things like the core 2, which is still widely used and represents a large attack surface.

Not everyone is on the "replace hardware every 2 years' train. 5 years should be the bare MINIMUM for support of any kind, 10 years is getting closer. There is just no need to stop supporting old hardware when it still works.

Your position is also probably shared by people that run older operating systems. In which case, who cares what vulnerabilities your CPU has if you are running XP or Vista because it "works".

 

[lexluthermiester]

I’m not holding my breath we are gonna see new BIOS for our boards...

Probably wise. However the bigger OEM's(like Acer, Dell and HP) have already committed to updates for systems that Intel provides patches for. So there is hope for some older system users.

 

[INSTG8R]

Probably wise. However the bigger OEM's(like Acer, Dell and HP) have already committed to updates for systems that Intel provides patches for. So there is hope for some older system users.

Well I was a avoiding the updates as it was breaking MoBo software I was using, but Win 10 being Windows turned updates back on and somewhere along the way my issues were resolved with later updates. I frankly don’t care at this point as everything is working fine. I don’t expect ASUS to make any effort.

 

[Assimilator]

Probably wise. However the bigger OEM's(like Acer, Dell and HP) have already committed to updates for systems that Intel provides patches for. So there is hope for some older system users.

Those OEMs have long-term support contracts with their customers that legally obligate them to continue to provide this sort of support. The end-user OEMs, not so much.

 

[voltage]

nor should they.

 

[coonbro]

like everything else . saves them money in support costs cause if a concern its now use there latest hardware and win-10 or suffer .. that's all its about . now see why win -10 is a service and not a OS ? that keeps that ball rolling . not hard to see what there up to with all this . I wonder how much of this is real or another tactic to ''force '' you to buy now and get on 10 ?

''that legally obligate them to continue to provide this sort of support ''
lol.. them days are gone you do as they see fit and subject to change with out notice ..lol...

 

[gnfpt]

The 2004 ford ranger is 15 years old, yet ford still recalled them to replace airbags. Putting a bit of code into a windows update doesn't require nearly as much work. What excuse does intel have other then trying to squeeze more money out of people and being lazy?

Processors are not operating systems. If there is a hardware vulnerability, it needs to be patched. Especially for things like the core 2, which is still widely used and represents a large attack surface.

Not everyone is on the "replace hardware every 2 years' train. 5 years should be the bare MINIMUM for support of any kind, 10 years is getting closer. There is just no need to stop supporting old hardware when it still works.

Car manufacturers do it only on life threatening issues, otherwise they'll put the fix on the next revision. At best you'll get it if you're under warranty.

 

[Ruru]

Age is irrelevant.

They sold the CPUs, the CPUs are still in widespread use, the CPUs have a design flaw that needs correcting.

Intel are basically giving AMD free marketing here lol.

Legacy hardware is legacy hardware, I'm not having that as a bad thing that Nvidia dropped driver support for Fermi and x86-32 for an example.