Carl, I stopped updating when MS broke Windows Update to force you to have to upgrade, or go insane waiting hours for it. I use Kaspersky, which has proven to be very reliable and snags stuff on an ongoing basis. It has several different intrusion detection systems and seems to stop everything.

Freedom, be careful, there are a lot of variations out there on the story, this one is the closest to correct:

https://www.pcmag.com/news/358249/int...

Being that I work for said Intel, I got a i75930, 6 cores, 12 threads, and 16GB ram, mainly to play Star Citizen, once they decide to get it out, although now they have 3.0 I might have to try it again. That said, the "flaw" is NOT a hardware issue, any more that anyone who finds a way to sneak into an operating system (pick one) means the OS is flawed. It is like saying if I can find a way to get into a locked car, the car is at fault. The real issue is that the world has allowed hackers to steal information, and money and data with impunity, because they are in other countries. If there were teams that could go in and say, blow up the building said hackers are in, it would drop off a lot. The lack of enforcement and action, especially by Russia and China (and several other countries) has made it a "build a bigger wall" game. The best, hardest protected system, can be hacked, eventually.

Sounds like an excellent, price/performance workstation. I usually waste some money going way up market, but my computers last a pretty long time. The last one when dual cores came out. I’m not counting the mac. I took that when my son stopped using it, after my HD crashed on mine.

I just upgraded, sort of. I had wanted a dual xeon for some time, and have been hitting a wall on my i5-2500k with 8gb of memory in doing music arrangements with Reaper DAW. I saw a Dell T5500 on Ebay with 24gb memory, 2 tb disk, and 2 6-core x5650 xeons for $200 Plus shipping and couldn't resist. I do have to add a pcie card for usb3 and SATA3 but thats inexpensive and there are 3 open 8x pcie slots.
Its from 2011- ergo the low price- but its well designed and memory is about $20-25 per 8Gb stick so if I want more memory its reasonable, too.
Probably not what you need for your work, but adequate for mine, and for less than the cost of a new i5 cpu. Of course, it could go casters up and it only had 30 days warranty;^)

Yes, I understand that.

The reason I'm asking is that I'm looking to upgrade my setup (dual screen 27" i5 iMac), and trying to decide between a I9 Gaming style PC with Windows or an iMac Pro with VMWare. I do image processing, and seek the wide I/O of the new processors and USB 3.1 buses. SSD, particularly an M.2, is given.

No, most users are primarily using single threaded operation, but most people only use the first 1 to 1.5 GHz of cpu speed and less than 50% of cpu usage in video playback, email, web surfing. (I have tracked cpu speed on my computer using CPUID and cpu load using task manager.) They don't need all the single threaded power that most recent (i3 equivalent or higher) cpus have.
SSds are the most noticeable advance in the past 5 years. CPU performance has been stagnant for most people's computer use. They have been improved but the only noticeable results are lighter weight, longer battery life in laptops and tablets, (and much more capable phones.)
Most won't perceive any slowdown resulting from the fix to the OS for this problem unless its due to the servers on the internet being slowed. (It's possible there may be some effects on really low end laptops and tablets if they are used for VHD video playback.)

You are saying that most computer usage takes advantage of multi-cores? I certainly didn't think so. I thought most apps were single threaded, except higher end photo and video, workstation SW (like FEA), and a few games.

Government performance is the primary excuse anyone should have to doubt that the moon landing occurred.;^)

Regarding Intel vs AMD single core, for most uses single core differences are irrelevant. There is no user perceived difference in everyday usage. Most can ignore single core performance differences between cpus (that perform at i3 and above benchmarks) and decide on price and multicore performance (assuming that is a factor in one's anticipated use.) For me that included used computers with i7 or xeon processors instead of newer processors with a 0% to 25% performance advantage at costs 400% higher.
I wonder if AMD is now planning price increases or will attempt gains in market share instead.

Agreed. I can't think of a bigger product recall problem - ever. But if what I read is correct, the only true "fix" (that doesn't decrease performance by 5-30%) is to replace the chip entirely. That's going to be neither an easy nor a cheap process. What to do with existing inventory? Yikes!

Back to AMD and a Threadriper perhaps. Maybe with this vulnerability corrected, AMD will advance in front of Intel again. $/performance, they have, and for serious multi-thread/core they do damn well. Intel principally wins on single core.

Gee, maybe this would've been better if the government managed it, and there was only one choice. Probably still be 8-bit 6502's.

Every time I see an Intel bug like this, I'm wistful for the old Macintosh design, with Motorola processors and the kernel in protected ROM. Apple decided (wrongly, I think) to take up the Intel banner when Motorola announced it was going the massively parallel route for better gaming performance. I'm not sure Motorola is even in the chip game anymore. I'm still a Mac user, but do wish they had stuck with the protected kernel as the ultimate security protection.

Intel also has a big problem with all their existing inventory of chips even the newest ones, and so do OEM's with existing computers.
Who wants to buy new computers with crippled cpus if a hardware fix is coming soon that can't be applied to existing hardware?

Maybe Intel will make a contribution to the Clinton foundation to make it all go away.;^)

Before Intel can make any offer, they have to fix their chips and prove they offer an advantage over fixes in operating systems.
I haven't seen enough advantage to buying new Intel chips in many years. My recent purchase is a 2011 Dell T5500 (dual xeons, 24gb memory, 2tb hd, etc) that cost less than a new Intel i5 cpu and outperforms all but the most powerful new i7s on multi-core apps. I wouldn't mind $10k in cash given that I have 12 Intel afflicted xeon(4), i5(5), and i7(3) cpus and selling them will be much difficult thanks to Intel. (grin)

What I read was that it was everything based on the x86 architecture. Xeons are a native 64-bit processor with completely different internal architecture. Most modern Intel processors are all backwards-compatible with the x86 architecture (and thus susceptible to the flaw), but the Xeons never were x86 chips in the first place. I'm trying to get more information from a source in the know, but I'm still waiting to hear back (he's trying to get a processor released ATM).

I second the observation about the class action thing. Several of my co-workers were skeptical, but the bar here (pun intended) isn't gross negligence (which requires intent) but merely negligence - a ridiculously low hurdle in most cases as it just relies on what is "reasonable". If I were Intel, I'd be offering up a rebate to everyone who has an affected chip to nip this in the bud before it turns into a lawsuit AND PR nightmare, but that's just me.

Where did you see that xeons are not affected? Every article I have read says "nearly every Intel cpu since the mid-1990s are affected" and articles also making other comments about how it will affect web servers. One might infer that includes xeons since many web servers have xeon processors. I'd rather Xeons be immune since I just bought a dual Xeon workstation.;^)

I can imagine a class action suit against Intel that ends with Intel providing greatly discounted new cpus for all affected parties (and paying a few hundred million to lawyers, of course.) Too bad that such new chips won't fit into old computers so Intel is then rewarded with millions of chipset and mobo sales to OEMs to keep Intel afloat. There has been very little cpu improvement for the average user in the past 6 years - and the Windows operating system has gone backwards in end user functionality for more than 10 years. Now they are better at sharing our private data with our enemies than keeping it safe.

If it has Intel on it and its not a Xeon (native 64-bit processor), it's affected. I've even read that because it is an architectural issue in the x86 design itself, that not even AMD is going to be totally immune to the two problems, but I've not seen verification one way or the other yet. (Though AMD's stock sure bumped at the end of last week.)

The OS workaround isn't really a fix, either - its a workaround for a hardware flaw. Thus the severe performance degradation. Only a new line of chips will really fix the problem.

PS...new post you may like. Kind of humor-going Galt. Innovation practiced by a young girl...funny photo and one of my innovations...ever see a 10' Zodac with twin merc's!?

Add your own innovation story...

Cold april/may then I planted veggies and was picken until mid november. Really didn't warm up to the usual temps until mid july. Dec, very cold but didn't snow until after christmas. We normally don't get the really cold until late january. We are a bit ahead of schedule on that front.

So yea..wacky weather alright.

Your snow will all begone by next weekend. If normal ours will melt in March then snow again then melt then snow...
Last year wet cool May then 5 weeks hot and dry
July was pretty normal .August was like none I have ever expirienced cloudy and cool normally we will have many nights that don't drop below 78 for low that was around the high for the month with many days a high of 68 or so. I hope David is wrong about the intensification but hope doesn't trump reality. The evidence suggest more and more extreme weather and cooler for the north. Take that you pesky mosquitos.

I appreciate the details thanks Wm Shipley.

As I understand it, the issue is that the memory used for the kernel (operating system) data which includes all kinds of security info, has memory addresses that the user programs can reach but they are blocked from access. When you call the operating system to perform a function such as read a block from a file, the memory is unblocked.

The bug is a technique which lets a program see the memory that it isn't supposed to have access to by using a technique designed to improve performance.

The slow down is by changing the operating system to make the system memory not in the user addressable space but switching back and forth when you do operating system calls will then be slower.

Who is Ellis Wyatt? ;^)
(Might have been George Mitchell.)

Coldest Dec/beginning of Jan since the 50ies. Temps in the 3degree range during the day not counting wind chill. 7 degrees in the sun!
Next week we will have normal 30/40 degree temps. Wind at work, off the water was brutal!

In Westbrook we got about 8" of snow, cleaned up Thursday afternoon but the wind blew it back and had to clean up again Friday morn.
Inland got 14" of snow.

Need to fill the oil tank again but supplies are low, Food stores low on stock...makes no sense what so ever. This is New England, we are supposed to be hardy and prepared for everything...see what happens when government tells you it's warming when it's not!

That is my understanding, too. All Intel cpus created "in the last ten years" (a bit vague for me) are affected and the slowness will be due to the fix done in the operating systems: Windows, Linux, OSX, etc. There are actually 3 recently uncovered security problems and only one affects AMD processors, and that one will affect their performance by only 5% per AMD. But the 3 fixes will all affect Intel cpus. Have to wait and see just how much the performance hit will be. Looks to cost Intel all the barely marginal performance increase they have been charging super-premium prices for over the past 5 years.