Microsoft offers microcode updates for Intel processors

It's annoying, I feel so left out now!

 

did you even read the article?

"These microcode updates do not appear as part of the cumulative Windows updates, but must be downloaded separately."

 

Well I guess I have to check this out. An earlier ucode from intel issued via Widows Update, busted overclocking on quite a few X99 BW-E systems. EVGA and other vendors have since updated the BIOS to support the latest ucode. And intel is supposed to be aware of the earlier foul up.

And...the edit is so quick I forgot to actually post this before applying the update manually.
No issues. They didn't break anything so far.

 

I don't get why people are so concerned about this microcode updates, did you feel the performance impact? did you get lower fps, system crashes, lower overall performance of your pc? All of this updates makes your windows experience more secure, and if we are talking about a 1-2% impact of overall performance than we are talking about a margin of error overall. I am doing pretty well with my i7 3770 (non K) oc'ed to 4.2 ghz and didn't even notice any sort of slowdown.

 

Actually unless I disable these mitigations, yes to all your questions except system crashes. And at one point, the ucode update completely disabled overclocking on some CPU models. There's significant impacts in newer uarchs. You didn't notice because for the most part you're already CPU limited on your GPU. Depending upon what you're doing, the impact can be over 30%.
I don't get why you're trying to down play the concerns of others...except perhaps as bait.

 

Windows 8.1 lost mainstream support in 2018

It's currently on "extended support", which effectively means: No guarantee to any specific patches, but theoretically, the OS will still get patches.

If that includes these patches at a later date, who knows.

 

Yeah....except it doesn't (beat the crap out of win10) as all proof points to the contrary. My own experience included. And I'm one of those "no thanks, I'll wait" guys when a new OS comes out. But fact is, Win10 > win 7 ESPECIALLY in performance. But hey, keep telling yourself that's not the case

 

No, I'm not, just telling my experience with the updates, not trying to bait working in the IT department at my place teached me that not updating can cause more problems then saying yes to an update. So for me all this cuts in performance are not as important as having the latest security updates

 

No you were not telling your experience. If you had just been relating your experience, I would have said nothing. What you said and asked was

"I don't get why people are so concerned about this microcode updates, did you feel the performance impact? did you get lower fps, system crashes, lower overall performance of your pc?"
As if there are not real and significant performance hits depending upon use case. Desktop SSD gets hammered. The security issue is separate and frankly a non issue for desktop user. As far as I am aware, not as single instance of a user being hacked in the wild. This is ignoring the professional space which cannot afford the security risks. Lastly,

not running UEFI if you have it available with your reasoning is just silly.

 

Well, you worked for a crap company mate. I've been doing the opposite for years and built hundreds of PC's for the company I worked for. We even had contracts from the department of juvenile justice to supply them with parts and ya know what even their IT team updates the computers regularly. I know software comes out faster then it use to be but it's ignorant to not have your computer updated. You guys call yaselfs enthusiast but all i see its "know it all know frack alls"

 

Choose yourself.
To me the fact that AMD CPUs were vulnerable for some of the latest side-channel vulnerabilities means that AMD did not think security, that their CPUs are just implemented differently - hence the difference in vulnerabilities.

 

seems the microcode updates included are fairly old, for instance the latest microcode for CFL-S is CA, the included microcode in this windows update is B4, seems about 8 months old,

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4497165/kb4497165-intel-microcode-updates

 

No, it's at OS level.

 

A critical warning back during the initial Spectre vulnerability revealed was that it could be used without leaving any trace.

So people should stop using that argument if they want to seem somewhat read up on the issue.

 

I am doing realistic comparison. Which means, that it is on very much alive platform which is going to be supported by its manufacturer in a year. And you'll be able to get brand new parts in few years.

You are talking EoL products on dead platforms. That cost more second hand (no warranty) than that mentioned Ryzen 7 2700X (new = full warranty).
And you are talking product that stutters in some games.
- - - -
I would like to see which members will advise someone to pay more for i7-4790K + its MB with no warranty instead of buying completely new Ryzen 7 2700X and some compatible and new board. (With all those extras AMD offers.)

 

its a valid argument and fine to use.

An attacker requires sustained local access to pull off an attack using these exploits as a vector, and non-local forms have been patched out by browser vendors.

 

You'd seem a lot more literate if you actually reflected what my post said and not your attempt to inflate your knowledge level. Do YOU have examples of this being exploited in a home user? I've not seen a single one in my wide reading on the subject. Secondarily, I addressed business risk separately. If you are going to reply to my posts, please make sure you understand them prior to inaccurately portraying them. Thanks.

 

Again youre doing a fully stupid comparison between a product released 3 years before and giving better performance than another released later, obviously nobody will buy one i7 4790k today, but who buyed one stay happy 3 years before you and yet beating you at today

Its like say who buyed a 1800x are stupid because today 3 years later he are worst than a 3600x costing less

 

There's newer info here:
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/security-center/advisory/intel-sa-00233.html

 

What you call beating is absurdly small fps difference. Yet, games where 4C/8T stutter...
You know, I used to have i5-2500K, because it was much better choice than 8C/8T Bulldozer when it came out. That was true for quite a few years.

But at time fast 4C/4T stopped being enough and my i5 caused stutter, anyone with 8C/8T Bulldozer had no stutter from CPU. (Still lower fps.)
Yet, even at that time my i5 delivered very high fps, just that freaking stutter in new games.

Moving to 2700X did not deliver much of an fps upgrade, but I never had stutter since then. So, you can go around and scream "beating" and "bit higher fps".
But anyone who already experienced CPU limitation knows that smoothness matters more than 5% fps difference.
(And over years, I experienced CPU limitation multiple times in era of 1C/1T CPUs. Then again as 2C/2T started to be insufficient. Then I saw it again as 2C/4T were not enough. ...)
- - - -
As for that absurdity at end. Going from 1800X to 3600X is damn cheap gaming upgrade. Show me what kind of performance "upgrade" you get if you spend same amount of money on intel's platform.
Well, you can't because Price difference between new 3600X and used 1800X is not even going to cover new MB needed on intel's side.

Scenarios you bring here are not based on real world economics, nor experiences.
What you preach is unhealthy for anyone who comes to believe it. They can make regretful economical decisions based on it.