Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Intel Says Some CPU Models Will Never Receive Microcode Updates (bleepingcomputer.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-about-that dept.

An anonymous reader writes: Intel released an update to the Meltdown and Spectre mitigation guide, revealing that it stopped working on mitigations for some processor series. The Meltdown and Spectre mitigation guide is a PDF document that Intel published in February. The file contains information on the status of microcode updates for each of Intel's CPU models released in the past years. Intel has constantly updated the document in the past weeks with new information about processor series and the microcode firmware version number that includes patches for the Meltdown and Spectre flaws.

An update published on Monday includes for the first time a "Stopped" production status. Intel says that processors with a "Stopped" status will not receive microcode updates. The reasons basically vary from "redesigning the CPU micro-architecture is impossible or not worth the effort" to "it's an old CPU" and "customers said they don't need it." The following Intel processor products received a "Stopped" status marker: Bloomfield, Bloomfield Xeon, Clarksfield, Gulftown, Harpertown Xeon C0, Harpertown Xeon E0, Jasper Forest, Penryn/QC, SoFIA 3GR, Wolfdale C0, Wolfdale M0, Wolfdale E0, Wolfdale R0, Wolfdale Xeon C0, Wolfdale Xeon E0, Yorkfield, and Yorkfield Xeon.

7 of 213 comments (clear)

  1. This is BS. by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry, but if I'm investing in a high-end, server-class CPU, I expect it to be supported for as long as is reasonably possible. If they said they weren't updating 10 year old Celerons or Atoms, that might be understandable. But Xeons? Let's just say I don't plan to every buy one again, at least so long as AMD represents a reasonable alternative. In fact, I will always stick with AMD (as I long have, for other reasons) until and unless Intel makes some kind of definite, enforceable support commitment.

    --

    Nonaggression works!
    1. Re:This is BS. by Joey+Vegetables · · Score: 4, Interesting

      None of this makes me feel any more inclined to favor Intel over AMD. This isn't their first "brown paper bag" bug and I doubt it will be their last. If only a 3 year warranty is even offered on some of the highest-end chips they made at the time, when some new cars are warrantied for 10, I think that says something really awful about even Intel's own assessment of whether its products can be supported in the long term. AMD may or may not be drastically better, but Intel has set a very low bar, and it is going to take them serious time to earn back my business, assuming they ever do.

      --

      Nonaggression works!
    2. Re:This is BS. by Archtech · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The processor of the PC on which I am writing this is just ten years old. Why do you believe that a ten-year-old processor should not be in use? (You should see my car: it's 18 years old. But then it's a Volvo, properly designed and robustly built).

      It's not even as if you can buy processors today that are very much faster than my ancient i7-940. Their price/performance may be better, but guess what? I don't care because I *already paid for mine*. Of course, I am referring to single-core performance which is the limiting factor for most desktop applications. The i7-940 has four cores, which I feel is about right for a desktop - any software that does benefit from parallelism will see a significant speed-up.

      Perhaps you are a devotee of the cult of technical progress. In which case you should take a long look at the facts, and understand that Intel microprocessors are not a very good example of such progress.

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    3. Re:This is BS. by Aaden42 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Realistically most enterprise customers use hardware for 3 to a MAXIMUM of 5 years, then it's out the door. Even high-end Xeon CPU's. It's entirely plausible that the bulk of actual enterprise customers(*) don't care.

      (*) Note: actual enterprise customers, not nerds who buy surplus servers off eBay to run in their basements.

      Disclaimer: I am one such nerd.

    4. Re:This is BS. by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      AMD may or may not be drastically better,

      Seeing as though AMD CPUs are not susceptible to Meltdown, I would say they have an enormous advantage over intel's. The fact is that Meltdown, unlike Spectre, is very easily exploitable in practical terms, and is the one people should be actually worried about.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  2. PDF ends with "Intel - Experience what's inside" by JoeyRox · · Score: 5, Funny

    Apparently what's inside is the experience of abandonment.

  3. Re:Old CPU's...and does it matter? by freeze128 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A BIOS update would certainly be nice, but it's not necessary. The OS can apply microcode updates (both windows and linux) during boot time. Also, these microcode updates don't survive a power-off event. There is no flash memory on the CPU. The OS would need to apply the microcode on every boot, which is what it does.