Slashdot Mirror


Intel Launches 8th Gen Core Series CPUs With Integrated AMD Radeon Graphics (hothardware.com)

MojoKid writes: At CES 2018, Intel unveiled more details of its 8th generation Intel Core processors with integrated AMD Radeon RX Vega M graphics. Like cats and dogs living together, the mashup of an Intel processor with an AMD GPU is made possible by an Embedded Multi-Die Interconnect Bridge (EMIB), which provides a high-speed data interconnect between the processor, GPU and 4GB of second-generation High-Bandwidth Memory (HBM2). Intel is delivering 8th generation H-Series Core processors in 65W TDP (laptops) and 100W TDP (desktops) SKUs that will take up 50 percent less PCB real estate, versus traditional discrete configs. Both the mobile and desktop variants of the processors will be available in Core i5 or Core i7 configurations, with 4 cores and 8 threads, up to 8MB of cache and 4GB of HBM2. The 65W mobile processors can boost up to 4.1GHz, while the Radeon RX Vega M GL GPU has base/boost clocks of 931MHz and 1011MHz, respectively. The AMD GPU has 20 compute units and memory bandwidth checks in at 179GB/s. Desktop processors ratchet the maximum boost slightly to 4.2GHz, while the base/boost clocks of the Radeon RX Vega M GH GPU jump to 1063MHz and 1190MHz, respectively. Desktop GPUs are also upgraded with 24 CUs and 204GB/s of memory bandwidth. Intel says that its 8th generation Core i7 with Radeon RX Vega M GL graphics is up to 1.4x faster than a Core i7-8550U with an NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 GPU in a notebook system. System announcements from Dell and HP are forthcoming, with availability in the first half of this year. Intel has also launched a new NUC small form factor gaming mini PC based on the technology as well.

12 of 123 comments (clear)

  1. does it run by Osgeld · · Score: 4, Funny

    Meltdown?

    1. Re:does it run by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Funny

      You bet your ass it does! So how many can I put you down for?

  2. Too soon? by AlexanKulbashian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Seems like Meltdown and Spectre fixes might not be making this build.

    1. Re:Too soon? by eclectro · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Meltdown is probably an easy fix even for the silicon. Spectre however, as far as I can see, is next to impossible to fix. Maybe somebody can correct me, but they need to get rid of the speculative execution pipeline all together.

      It really seems very facetious of them to try to sell everybody on their new CPUs with this very heavy baggage hanging over their chips.

      --
      Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
  3. Re:Defective by omnichad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So if you buy an Intel CPU you will need to deal with Meltdown.

    By using an up-to-date version of Windows, Mac, or Linux. And if you don't buy an Intel CPU, you still need a very similar fix to mitigate Spectre.

    Like it or not, this is not going to end in a mass recall - it's a fundamental design flaw with speculative execution. Poor security is a bug, but they delivered everything they promised on the box. This is not a simple patch. It's a complete redesign of a huge section of the die - and even if you do get your recall, it's going to be years before a new design can be fabricated and mass-produced. By then, it will be replaced and obsolete.

  4. Re:Does it run Crysis? by arglebargle_xiv · · Score: 5, Informative

    No idea, but it's definitely vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown.

  5. Re:Defective by mlyle · · Score: 4, Informative

    > And if you don't buy an Intel CPU, you still need a very similar fix to mitigate Spectre.

    Fixing meltdown requires kernel unmap/KPTI. This comes with a 20-30% tax for many workloads. I know people at hosting firms with shit melting down because they've installed the patch and now they have degenerate end-user workloads.

    Spectre requires a million little fixes that are generally cheap in performance.

  6. Obligatory:Intel CPU Backdoor Report (Jan 1 2018) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Change log:
    2018/01/01 - Added 14 Useful Links. Disable Intel ME 11 via undocumented NSA "High Assurance Platform" mode, Blackhat Dec 2017 presentation, Intel ME CVEs (CVSS Scored 9.0-10.0)

    Intel CPU Backdoor Report
    The goal of this report is to make the existence of Intel CPU backdoors a common knowledge and provide information on backdoor removal.

    What we know about Intel CPU backdoors so far:

    TL;DR version

    Your Intel CPU and Chipset is running a backdoor as we speak.

    The backdoor hardware is inside the CPU/Bridge and the backdoor firmware (Intel Management Engine) is in the chipset flash memory.

    30C3 Intel ME live hack:
    [Video] 30C3: Persistent, Stealthy, Remote-controlled Dedicated Hardware Malware
    @21:43, keystrokes leaked from Intel ME above the OS, wireshark failed to detect packets.

    [Quotes] Vortrag:
    "the ME provides a perfect environment for undetectable sensitive data leakage on behalf of the attacker".

    "We can permanently monitor the keyboard buffer on both operating system targets."

    Backdoor removal:
    The backdoor firmware can be removed by following this guide using the me_cleaner script.
    Removal requires a Raspberry Pi (with GPIO pins) and a SOIC clip.

    2017 Dec Update:
    Intel ME on recent CPUs may be disabled by enabling the undocumented NSA HAP mode.

    Decoding Intel backdoors:
    The situation is out of control and the Libreboot/Coreboot community is looking for BIOS/Firmware experts to help with the Intel ME decoding effort.

    If you are skilled in these areas, download Intel ME firmwares from this collection and have a go at them, beware Intel is using a lot of counter measures to prevent their backdoors from being decoded (explained below).

    Useful links (Added 2018 Jan 1):
    Disabling Intel ME 11 via undocumented mode (NSA High Assurance Platform mode)
    Blackhat 2017: How To Hack A Turned Off Computer Or Running Unsigned Code In Intel Management Engine
    EFF: Intel's Management Engine is a security hazard, and users need a way to disable it
    Sakaki's EFI Install Guide/Disabling the Intel Management Engine
    Intel ME bug storm: Hardware vendors race to identify and provide updates for dangerous Intel flaws.
    CVE-2017-5689: An unprivileged network attacker could gain system privileges to provisioned Intel manageability SKUs
    CVE-2017-5705: Multiple buffer overflows in kernel in Intel Manageability Engine Firmware
    CVE-2017-5706: Multiple buffer overflows in kernel in Intel Server Platform Services Firmware

  7. Re:AMD's strategy by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 4, Informative

    But partnering with Intel to create an Intel APU defeats the purpose of buying an AMD APU.

    Not really.

    The AMD parts will be cheaper.

    They'll be easier to overclock.

    The AMD parts may have some advantages on bus interconnects, being from the same vendor (benchmarks will tell...).

    There's a real chance that Global gets to 7nm first.

    Yet ... somebody who really wants an Intel anyway and won't consider an AMD CPU -
      - well, they're getting AMD graphics. That helps in the AMD/nVidia marketshare battle and it looks like Intel may be existing that market as well.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  8. Dear intel by Khyber · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Putting AMD hardware next to yours doesn't automatically grant immunity from Meltdown and Spectre. Nice try, though.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  9. Re:Hey Meltdown trolls.... by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Insightful

    eh, I read AMD is only vulnerable to Spectre variant 1

    you have source for your claim anything but Intel and certain ARM are vulnerable to Meltdown?

  10. Since when did NVidia become a bigger threat... by WoTG · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I understand Intel wanting a GPU to pair efficiently with their CPUs for the smallest form factors... but I don't see why AMD and not NVidia. Did NVidia turn them down? Or does Intel really consider NVidia, who doesn't make AMD64 chips, to be a bigger threat than AMD? Or is there something inherent in the GPU platforms that makes AMD possible but not NVidia?