The lowpoints involving CTS-Labs and Krzanich demonstrate the enduring importance treating others with respect. In these instances selfishness and dishonesty were not rewarded. Moreover, one has to wonder what the medium to long-term cost will be of Krzanich's slashing Intel's research expenditures. That has to hurt.
Respect, like when Google hacked iOS and Safari to install spyware payloads (evercookies)?
Or, when it helps with metadata-using algorithms to target US citizens for drone elimination?
Or, when it lied to its own people over China's Dragonfly? Shall I continue?
Reality is that when someone stomps their feet and points fingers when anyone, whether it's a journalist or a self-described security company, exposes flaws in products that have been sold in the market — the blame for those flaws rests solely on the company that created them and put them into the marketplace. Do not shoot the messenger, no matter how much of the guilty company's stock you own.
Google isn't your friend either. No corporation is. They're all out for one thing and one thing only: profit for their people.
Wild-eyed cries, demands for censorship, place the world at greater risk than transparency does. People are owed the knowledge of defects in their products, immediately. It should always be assumed that bad actors have the information during these blackout periods. CTS did the right thing by refusing to have a long one so the guilty party (AMD) could diminish its accountability with PR machinations.
Public outrage is maximized when knowledge is given to them immediately. That's why coverups last for such a long time. We get to find out about the bad deeds decades later, like how the government settled with the family of an intelligence worker who was apparently pushed out of a tall building to keep him from blowing the whistle. Muzzling the so-called free press is not the way to go but there is so much clamor in the tech community for exactly that. The ideological difference between us Westerners and the Chinese is what, exactly?
Respect is earned, not given. Companies that sell defective products have the responsibility to find the problems, make the knowledge public immediately, and fix the problems with maximum haste. They don't have the responsibility to lazily wait for PR-friendly media blackouts arbitrarily chosen by random third parties (particularly those intent on devouring the Internet like Google) expire, after those random unelected third parties find them.
The idea of a free press is humorous in some circles.
The idea that consumers should be informed when the products they have been sold are defective is humorous in some circles.
The idea that companies shouldn't be able to collude with unelected third parties to muzzle the tech press, so that PR damage control campaigns can minimize accountability is humorous in some circles.
If any of you truly believe that it's a good thing to have press censorship to protect the reputations and stock prices of companies from ordinary people (rather than insiders) that sell defective goods, then I suggest codifying that with an elected and accountable body rather than blithely enabling for-profit corporations, which do not have a mandate to work in the public interest, to control the narrative and the flow of information with whatever arbitrary processes they dream up to help with their quest for profit and dominance. This means things like standardization in procedures (such as the apparently very beloved first-amendment-quashing blackout periods), standards that are voted on and vetted by a larger community than various corporations' executives.
(Oh, look, it's a bot! It's not the person posting "Lol" or the brainless ad hominem one-two sentence troll posts that so many in the tech community think are impressive enough to masquerade as a rebuttal.)
That's the best dodge you can come up with? There is a lot more to my post than Google specifically but it's also easy enough to see the relevance, if one chooses to.
It's a placement strategy. Getting the first reply into the first post, whether or not the reply is relevant to the OP, is rewarded with visibility. Visibility feeds controversy and offers the person behind the reply many chances to respond and feel rewarded for the attention gained or controversy created.
Big fan of Adams, FWIW. I don't think that counted as a word-salad. It's a decently posed piece of rhetoric. You can disagree with the points, but IMO no WS... I actually like the POV, but somewhat lack the inside-baseball tech background to fully appreciate. Good series of comments though :)
This is my alternate account. I have come to say that my opinions here should be ignored as my wife left me 2 years ago leaving me depressed and spiteful, searching for comments on PC Websites to calm my rage. I apologize.
One thing about Kaby Lake G - like in this XPS 15 2in1 - it actually not an integrated GPU - it is discreet GPU on EMiB. I feel this is basis of future mobile and possibly other Intel CPU.
But AMD did something bad with Kaby Lake G, even though it stated as Vega, it actually older generation, I don't expect Intel will be doing another product with AMD GPU, next up is likely their own.
On Good side - it is significant faster than previous i7 GPU
I thought for sure why it was Polaris is because they were aiming this product at Apple.
One interesting aspect of Kaby Lake G, especially on laptops, was that because the CPU and GPU were located on the same package, they ended up sharing the cooling solution. They were rated at 65W or 100W TDP for the two combined. Which meant when you weren't using the GPU, your laptop CPU which normally would've been thermal throttling under moderate load due to a tiny cooler sufficient for a mere 15W TDP, well now suddenly it had 65W of headroom and could run at max turbo boost all day.
So even though the specs for the CPU half were the same as other equivalent laptop CPUs, in practical use it was faster.
AMD was not going to provide their primary competitor in the CPU space access to their latest GPU tech via Vega. Instead, they split the difference: used Polaris (sufficiently old and performant enough) and marketed it as Vega M GH/GL.
Apple, on the other hand, got access to true Vega Mobile earlier this year. There was a rumor going around that Vega's SoC circuit was primarily designed for Apple, as you can transcode video without waking the GPU; it'd just use the SoC circuit and activate full memory clocks when video fixed function blocks were used.
Vega only supports HBM2, they're doing the same thing with the current Ryzen Graphics. It's also Polaris labelled Vega. Although feature-wise there isn't much difference. The main differences are memory support and overall number of cores.
Quote: "Intel also launched its Xeon D-2100 platform, placing it in a spot above its previous Xeon D-1500 line-up. These processors were different to the older ones because instead of using Atom cores".
Ian, Xeon D-1500 is NOT Atom-based, it is Broadwell.
The case of Intel's CEO being fired was nothing more than a consensual relationship that Intel does not allow and thus he was fired. It happened more than 10 years ago and he's no Bill Cosby with fuckin' drugs in drinks, vile nauseating behavior and now no more than a criminal of the worst kind.
I strongly suspect that if 10nm was up and running Intel would have kept their CEO. If they can at least claim to hold the CEO to sexual harassment/conflict of interest standards, it makes it look like the requirements have teeth (even if you aren't sure that was enough to fire him on its own).
Going through customs with a case of benchmarking gear must be FUN. No sirreeee, not a bomb I promise !
Looking back at 2018 is fine. I'd be interested in advice going forward too: my PC is some old Core i5 on DDR3... I'm not quite sure if we've reached the "wow, that upgrade was worth it" point, which is, what, 2x performance for the same $150ish IIRC budget ?
Reviews usually only compare recent stuff, which leaves casual users like me, with a 5-10yrs upgrade cycle, kind of wondering. The yearly recap would be a logical place to have a long term, bird's eye view of what $50, $100, $250, $500 got/gets you then and now for CPU. And GPU.
If you're using a higher end GPU an older i5 will be a CPU bottleneck. I've got a friend with an i5-3xxx system, who recently upgraded to a 1080ti and 4k. A CPU/mobo/ram upgrade's now on his near term todo because his CPU is holding him back.
That's not universally true, it depends on the game/task, and the higher the resolution & detail, the less the CPU matters so much, especially for DX12/Vulcan titles. It's best to check reviews, bench database info, etc. for the actual games one is going to play. Even so, the degree to which an older platform can or will hold back a newer GPU (or indeed SSD) often isn't as bad as many assume it will be. However, drivers and chipset support can complicate things. Still, one can get a hefty value upgrade without spending much if one just wants an interim solution until something new like Zen2, eg. used X79 and a 3930K/4930K is still very potent.
There are also newer games which do run better with 4c/8t. Depends on the game.
My gaming days are over I replaced a dead vidcard with only a 1060, but a few ports on my current mobo seem to be flaky (ethernet and a few USB), so maybe I should renew the thing.
I'm kind of waiting for hardware solutions to the cache exploits though, as well as hardware AV1.
Clearly AT has turned in to yet another over-sensationalized media outlet, at least to the extent that any "tech news" can even be sensational, since it matters to so few people.
All these stories about Spectre, Meltdown, CTS, etc. literally mean nothing. It affected no one. The only story here is that somebody finally "broke the code" after 20 years of trying to find an exploit in speculative execution. THAT is the cool part.
Here is your big news. AMD is poised to kick Intel's butt with huge-core offerings, while Intel falters badly deploying its 10nm. Will Intel respond? Will AMD really become relevant again? Intel plays the #metoo card to fire its CEO, and 6 months later still has not named a new chief. All the while, ARM makes zero headway into PCs and servers, as previously promised for many years now. Hidden amongst all of this is the fact that there has been no real marked improvement to the devices that people mostly use -- laptops and 2-in-1s. Features, battery life, and performance really gained nothing this year.
As a long time reader and lurker, thank you AnandTech for very in depth coverage. It was thanks to your efforts, along with many others, who influenced my decision to finally bet on AMD with my PC again. I'm enjoying the performance of the 2990WX and knowing I never fear new CPU launches, knowing my pins were designed from the start to be forward expansion based.
Even with AM4, AMD has made it clear that it was designed with longevity and support in mind, and Intel is obviously caught off guard with AMD having stayed alive long enough for truly smart computing individuals to code new types of ideas, with. Every hardware instruction was once a "single threaded" idea that became a hardware based solution. Any type of code can be made parallel if you throw away the idea of the code itself and have a language, compiler, and system that from the ground up, catered for the usual, predictable problems of keeping multiple cores in sync.
Thank You, I will be cross posting your website to /r/RIPIntel and I would like to remind everyone to set AdBlock to "off" when reading this site, as Anandtech does a tasteful job with ads and it pays for them to continue to operate.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
42 Comments
Back to Article
damonlynch - Thursday, December 27, 2018 - link
The lowpoints involving CTS-Labs and Krzanich demonstrate the enduring importance treating others with respect. In these instances selfishness and dishonesty were not rewarded. Moreover, one has to wonder what the medium to long-term cost will be of Krzanich's slashing Intel's research expenditures. That has to hurt.Oxford Guy - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
Respect, like when Google hacked iOS and Safari to install spyware payloads (evercookies)?Or, when it helps with metadata-using algorithms to target US citizens for drone elimination?
Or, when it lied to its own people over China's Dragonfly? Shall I continue?
Reality is that when someone stomps their feet and points fingers when anyone, whether it's a journalist or a self-described security company, exposes flaws in products that have been sold in the market — the blame for those flaws rests solely on the company that created them and put them into the marketplace. Do not shoot the messenger, no matter how much of the guilty company's stock you own.
Google isn't your friend either. No corporation is. They're all out for one thing and one thing only: profit for their people.
Wild-eyed cries, demands for censorship, place the world at greater risk than transparency does. People are owed the knowledge of defects in their products, immediately. It should always be assumed that bad actors have the information during these blackout periods. CTS did the right thing by refusing to have a long one so the guilty party (AMD) could diminish its accountability with PR machinations.
Public outrage is maximized when knowledge is given to them immediately. That's why coverups last for such a long time. We get to find out about the bad deeds decades later, like how the government settled with the family of an intelligence worker who was apparently pushed out of a tall building to keep him from blowing the whistle. Muzzling the so-called free press is not the way to go but there is so much clamor in the tech community for exactly that. The ideological difference between us Westerners and the Chinese is what, exactly?
Respect is earned, not given. Companies that sell defective products have the responsibility to find the problems, make the knowledge public immediately, and fix the problems with maximum haste. They don't have the responsibility to lazily wait for PR-friendly media blackouts arbitrarily chosen by random third parties (particularly those intent on devouring the Internet like Google) expire, after those random unelected third parties find them.
Lord of the Bored - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
Man, I thought the CTS shills died when their blatant stock-shorting scheme collapsed on its face.tamalero - Saturday, December 29, 2018 - link
They probably have a contract for botters that act like shills to defend the brand. It happens a lot lately.Oxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
The same ad hominem can be applied to posts like yours. Post a rebuttal and refrain from posting spam.Oxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
No rebuttal, just an ad hominem. Par for the course.kd_ - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
LolOxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
The idea of a free press is humorous in some circles.The idea that consumers should be informed when the products they have been sold are defective is humorous in some circles.
The idea that companies shouldn't be able to collude with unelected third parties to muzzle the tech press, so that PR damage control campaigns can minimize accountability is humorous in some circles.
If any of you truly believe that it's a good thing to have press censorship to protect the reputations and stock prices of companies from ordinary people (rather than insiders) that sell defective goods, then I suggest codifying that with an elected and accountable body rather than blithely enabling for-profit corporations, which do not have a mandate to work in the public interest, to control the narrative and the flow of information with whatever arbitrary processes they dream up to help with their quest for profit and dominance. This means things like standardization in procedures (such as the apparently very beloved first-amendment-quashing blackout periods), standards that are voted on and vetted by a larger community than various corporations' executives.
(Oh, look, it's a bot! It's not the person posting "Lol" or the brainless ad hominem one-two sentence troll posts that so many in the tech community think are impressive enough to masquerade as a rebuttal.)
gteichrow - Thursday, January 24, 2019 - link
Well said.Flunk - Saturday, December 29, 2018 - link
Good luck with the word-salad of irrelevant whataboutism. OP didn't say a word about Google.Oxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
Not a rebuttal.Oxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
"OP didn't say a word about Google."That's the best dodge you can come up with? There is a lot more to my post than Google specifically but it's also easy enough to see the relevance, if one chooses to.
PeachNCream - Thursday, January 3, 2019 - link
It's a placement strategy. Getting the first reply into the first post, whether or not the reply is relevant to the OP, is rewarded with visibility. Visibility feeds controversy and offers the person behind the reply many chances to respond and feel rewarded for the attention gained or controversy created.gteichrow - Thursday, January 24, 2019 - link
Big fan of Adams, FWIW. I don't think that counted as a word-salad. It's a decently posed piece of rhetoric. You can disagree with the points, but IMO no WS... I actually like the POV, but somewhat lack the inside-baseball tech background to fully appreciate. Good series of comments though :)Diji1 - Tuesday, January 1, 2019 - link
Oxford Guy is dangerous because he will bore you to death with the ol' wall'o'text.Oxford Guy 2 - Monday, January 14, 2019 - link
This is my alternate account. I have come to say that my opinions here should be ignored as my wife left me 2 years ago leaving me depressed and spiteful, searching for comments on PC Websites to calm my rage. I apologize.Oxford Guy 2 - Monday, January 14, 2019 - link
I also robbed a bank when I was 27, references available upon requestwiteken - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
Intel's R&D has not at all come down.Also, that affair that caused BK to resign happened before that rule was even put in place.
HStewart - Thursday, December 27, 2018 - link
One thing about Kaby Lake G - like in this XPS 15 2in1 - it actually not an integrated GPU - it is discreet GPU on EMiB. I feel this is basis of future mobile and possibly other Intel CPU.But AMD did something bad with Kaby Lake G, even though it stated as Vega, it actually older generation, I don't expect Intel will be doing another product with AMD GPU, next up is likely their own.
On Good side - it is significant faster than previous i7 GPU
I thought for sure why it was Polaris is because they were aiming this product at Apple.
Lord of the Bored - Thursday, December 27, 2018 - link
Welcome to mobile graphics naming. Been an exasperating practice on both AMD and nVidia's side for years. Intel knew what part they were getting.Solandri - Saturday, December 29, 2018 - link
One interesting aspect of Kaby Lake G, especially on laptops, was that because the CPU and GPU were located on the same package, they ended up sharing the cooling solution. They were rated at 65W or 100W TDP for the two combined. Which meant when you weren't using the GPU, your laptop CPU which normally would've been thermal throttling under moderate load due to a tiny cooler sufficient for a mere 15W TDP, well now suddenly it had 65W of headroom and could run at max turbo boost all day.So even though the specs for the CPU half were the same as other equivalent laptop CPUs, in practical use it was faster.
JasonMZW20 - Saturday, December 29, 2018 - link
AMD was not going to provide their primary competitor in the CPU space access to their latest GPU tech via Vega. Instead, they split the difference: used Polaris (sufficiently old and performant enough) and marketed it as Vega M GH/GL.Apple, on the other hand, got access to true Vega Mobile earlier this year. There was a rumor going around that Vega's SoC circuit was primarily designed for Apple, as you can transcode video without waking the GPU; it'd just use the SoC circuit and activate full memory clocks when video fixed function blocks were used.
Flunk - Saturday, December 29, 2018 - link
Vega only supports HBM2, they're doing the same thing with the current Ryzen Graphics. It's also Polaris labelled Vega. Although feature-wise there isn't much difference. The main differences are memory support and overall number of cores.bolkhov - Thursday, December 27, 2018 - link
Quote: "Intel also launched its Xeon D-2100 platform, placing it in a spot above its previous Xeon D-1500 line-up. These processors were different to the older ones because instead of using Atom cores".Ian, Xeon D-1500 is NOT Atom-based, it is Broadwell.
dafino - Thursday, December 27, 2018 - link
Small typo in the section about Moore's desk. There's a line about the awards Moore and Intel have "one".Oxford Guy - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
"Some of these fixes cause performance regression in certain tasks, mostly enterprise based"Like hyperthreading, which OpenBSD's developers disable completely because of its apparent inherent insecurity?
imaheadcase - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
"apparent" lolOxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
Go laugh at the OpenBSD team. Maybe you'll impress them.f1nalpr1m3 - Friday, December 28, 2018 - link
The case of Intel's CEO being fired was nothing more than a consensual relationship that Intel does not allow and thus he was fired. It happened more than 10 years ago and he's no Bill Cosby with fuckin' drugs in drinks, vile nauseating behavior and now no more than a criminal of the worst kind.wumpus - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
I strongly suspect that if 10nm was up and running Intel would have kept their CEO. If they can at least claim to hold the CEO to sexual harassment/conflict of interest standards, it makes it look like the requirements have teeth (even if you aren't sure that was enough to fire him on its own).NetMage - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
This article seems to be missing any discussion of Apple, Qualcomm and Samsung and the mobile processor world?PeachNCream - Thursday, January 3, 2019 - link
Check the previously published mobile phone article. It has a bit of what you're looking for.StormyParis - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
Going through customs with a case of benchmarking gear must be FUN. No sirreeee, not a bomb I promise !Looking back at 2018 is fine. I'd be interested in advice going forward too: my PC is some old Core i5 on DDR3... I'm not quite sure if we've reached the "wow, that upgrade was worth it" point, which is, what, 2x performance for the same $150ish IIRC budget ?
Reviews usually only compare recent stuff, which leaves casual users like me, with a 5-10yrs upgrade cycle, kind of wondering. The yearly recap would be a logical place to have a long term, bird's eye view of what $50, $100, $250, $500 got/gets you then and now for CPU. And GPU.
DanNeely - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
If you're using a higher end GPU an older i5 will be a CPU bottleneck. I've got a friend with an i5-3xxx system, who recently upgraded to a 1080ti and 4k. A CPU/mobo/ram upgrade's now on his near term todo because his CPU is holding him back.mapesdhs - Wednesday, January 2, 2019 - link
That's not universally true, it depends on the game/task, and the higher the resolution & detail, the less the CPU matters so much, especially for DX12/Vulcan titles. It's best to check reviews, bench database info, etc. for the actual games one is going to play. Even so, the degree to which an older platform can or will hold back a newer GPU (or indeed SSD) often isn't as bad as many assume it will be. However, drivers and chipset support can complicate things. Still, one can get a hefty value upgrade without spending much if one just wants an interim solution until something new like Zen2, eg. used X79 and a 3930K/4930K is still very potent.There are also newer games which do run better with 4c/8t. Depends on the game.
mapesdhs - Wednesday, January 2, 2019 - link
EDIT: oops, I mangled that, I meant there are games which do run better with more than 4c/8t.StormyParis - Sunday, January 6, 2019 - link
My gaming days are over I replaced a dead vidcard with only a 1060, but a few ports on my current mobo seem to be flaky (ethernet and a few USB), so maybe I should renew the thing.I'm kind of waiting for hardware solutions to the cache exploits though, as well as hardware AV1.
jjjag - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
Clearly AT has turned in to yet another over-sensationalized media outlet, at least to the extent that any "tech news" can even be sensational, since it matters to so few people.All these stories about Spectre, Meltdown, CTS, etc. literally mean nothing. It affected no one. The only story here is that somebody finally "broke the code" after 20 years of trying to find an exploit in speculative execution. THAT is the cool part.
Here is your big news. AMD is poised to kick Intel's butt with huge-core offerings, while Intel falters badly deploying its 10nm. Will Intel respond? Will AMD really become relevant again? Intel plays the #metoo card to fire its CEO, and 6 months later still has not named a new chief. All the while,
ARM makes zero headway into PCs and servers, as previously promised for many years now. Hidden amongst all of this is the fact that there has been no real marked improvement to the devices that people mostly use -- laptops and 2-in-1s. Features, battery life, and performance really gained nothing this year.
Oxford Guy - Sunday, December 30, 2018 - link
"somebody finally 'broke the code' after 20 years of trying to find an exploit in speculative execution"You have no proof of that, only speculation.
Badelhas - Monday, December 31, 2018 - link
Why are you always so arrogant? You could make your point without being like that, you know?Cheers
mapesdhs - Wednesday, January 2, 2019 - link
A degree of trolling feeds the ego perhaps, hard to say...NovaExclusives - Wednesday, January 2, 2019 - link
As a long time reader and lurker, thank you AnandTech for very in depth coverage. It was thanks to your efforts, along with many others, who influenced my decision to finally bet on AMD with my PC again. I'm enjoying the performance of the 2990WX and knowing I never fear new CPU launches, knowing my pins were designed from the start to be forward expansion based.Even with AM4, AMD has made it clear that it was designed with longevity and support in mind, and Intel is obviously caught off guard with AMD having stayed alive long enough for truly smart computing individuals to code new types of ideas, with. Every hardware instruction was once a "single threaded" idea that became a hardware based solution. Any type of code can be made parallel if you throw away the idea of the code itself and have a language, compiler, and system that from the ground up, catered for the usual, predictable problems of keeping multiple cores in sync.
Thank You, I will be cross posting your website to /r/RIPIntel and I would like to remind everyone to set AdBlock to "off" when reading this site, as Anandtech does a tasteful job with ads and it pays for them to continue to operate.
Thanks guys!