Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Advice Against Nehalem Xeons Snuffed Out

Eukariote writes "In an article outlining hidden strife in the processor world, Andreas Stiller has reported the scoop that Microsoft advised against the use of Intel Nehalem Xeon (Core i7/i5) processors under Windows Server 2008 R2, but was pressured by Intel to refrain from publishing this advisory. The issue concerns a bug causing spurious interrupts that locks up the Hypervisor of Server 2008. Though there is a hotfix, it is unattractive as it disables power savings and turbo boost states. (The original German-language version of the article is also available.)"

9 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Spurious Interrupt, eh? by chebucto · · Score: 4, Funny

    Maybe Xeons are what end up being used on the UESG Marathon. I mean, half of the terminal messages on that ship are subject to the same bug. Just look at this typical example:

    http://marathon.bungie.org/story/nawmanhesclose.html#M3.13.1.1

    --
    The English word fart is one of the oldest words in the English vocabulary.
  2. Windows specific? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    It sounds like microsoft should retract the advice and issue a warning that no OS should be run on a processor with such spurious interrupts?

    Or is this the sort of crappy hardware kernels are supposed to put up with in which case it should be Intel advising against running windows on it's hardware?

    Int€l bashing..check
    M$ bahing...check
    now i just sit back and watch the karma roll in

    1. Re:Windows specific? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Uh, guy? That symbol you used is a "C" with two lines through it, not an "E". Get it right.

    2. Re:Windows specific? by onefriedrice · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think you just missed out on the joke. It's unlikely the OP meant to show any kind of disrespect (heaven forbid) for the wonderful, lovely Euro, so try not to be so defensive huh? Relax.

      --
      This author takes full ownership and responsibility for the unpopular opinions outlined above.
  3. Re:Damn pesky kids by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nothing to see here. Move along. What? Nevermind where I work.

    Sorry, didn't get the message - running with interrupts disabled due to too many interrupts - so Im goo@#@!%!!#)(MN!NO CARRIER

    I for one welcome our non-interrupted cpu overlords, because in Soviet Russia, interrupts disable YOU!

  4. Re:What about for Windows 7? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    No problems at all. I'm running an i7 920 with 12 GB of RAM and Windows 7 64-Bit Ultimate. I've been playing BF2, GTA4, COD:MW/MW2, Batman: AA and others without any problem. Not to mention running 2 or 3 VMWare sessions, putty sessions, winscp, IE8, pidgin and streaming TV through Windows Media Center all at the same time.

    Okay you have a big penis (not literally). We get it.

  5. Re:What about for Windows 7? by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1, Funny

    (cue a dozen replies of people talking about how cool they are because they use pirated copies for said purpose)

    I'm cool because I use a pirated copy of Windows Server for said purpose.

    (Looks around.) Hey, waitaminute! Where'd the other 11 guys go? I've been set up! Curse you Microsoft and your clever Slashdot traps!

  6. Re:Please Explain Further by oldhack · · Score: 5, Funny

    Your explanation is exactly how I interpreted the KB article. I think Slashdot was going for some sensationalistic journalism. :-)

    NO WAY!

    --
    Fuck systemd. Fuck Redhat. Fuck Soylent, too. Wait, scratch the last one.
  7. Re:Inverted perceptions and Llanelli by daveime · · Score: 2, Funny

    Thousand(s) implies at least two thousand.

    Ergo, you use each program on average for 43.2 seconds. Is this because they *all* suck, or you simply have the attention span of a concussed duckling ?