Intel Skylake and Kabylake bug...
nicstt
Posts: 11,715
in The Commons
http://hexus.net/tech/news/cpu/107293-serious-intel-skylake-kaby-lake-microcode-bug-unearthed/
Bugs, they just keep on crawling out of the woodwork.
Daz 3D is part of 
Connect
DAZ Productions, Inc.
224 S 200 W, Suite #250
Salt Lake City, UT 84101
Licensing Agreement | Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | EULA
© 2024 Daz Productions Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Comments
Thank you for the heads up. Will be watching for a mb update
Might explain why some people complain about DS crashing under certain circumstances, while others have no problems (I don't, and don't have any of those CPUs).
I guess it must be especially problematic for developers who may encounter mysterious bugs which they can't track down.
Might be. I have had odd behavior here and there when starting DS. I will be checking all MB software when ASUS gets an update for this.
Oh that's lovely......
Indeed.
Trying to narrow down bugs is hard enough without having to consider bugs in hardware.
Intel really has been slacking off durring AMD's non competitive CPU generation (Socket AM3 and AM3+)
It's a good thing there is competition in the market again.
And hopefully it keeps going, since from what I understand that once upon a time Intel used to solder the IHS right to the die of the CPU but since the release of the Ivy Bridge CPU's they are no longer doing it, and are using a cheaper thermal paste instead..
Where as AMD are soldering the IHS to the cpu die thus better heat dissipation, and with that I am thinking of going AMD for that reason..
Indeed. Competition always seems to be good.
Yeh, I'm waiting for the new processors before I decide which AMD to go for.
You mean the new Ryzen Threadripper CPUs, right? I'm waiting on those to see what I get too, although I'll get Intel or AMD, whichever winds up being better for my use.
yup the threadripper.
I'm planning on AMD, purely to support em; the difference between intel and AMD aren't likely to be significant enough to make me chose intel instead, if intel ends up ahead in tests.
Then there's the corners they're cutting, hardly the first time they've done it.
Sadly neither company is perfect.
I wonder what the heat will be like for the new AMDs vs the new Intels. Intel has always run cooler.
I wonder if this also affects Broadwell, as Daz tends to crash quite a lot using my Nvidia equipped I7-5500, but not my supposedly simpler Radeon equipped AMD A12 cpu'd rig.
...not from what I've seen with bench tests of the new Skylake-X CPUs. One review mentioned that even with the best CPU cooler on the market they still run very hot, especially when overclocked, due to the switch from solder to thermal paste. Last thing I need is a 1,700$ CPU to "blow a gasket" because the thermal paste failed.
Still waiting on bench tests for Threadripper and single socket Epyc 7501 using the X399 MB.
I don't know where you get that from. Other than this Dell Precision and my gamiing notebooks, all of my computers have been AMD all the way back to the K6-2 days. I have never had any heat issues with them.
Personal experiance. My AMDs ran a lot hotter then my Intels have over the past 16 years.
I have not looked at bench marks as I am not in the market for a new computer. It would be nice to see a comparison between simular CPUs from both companies with a top end Noctua CPU heatsink.
True enough, but they were traditionally power hungry processors; the new ones seem different, although it will be interesting to see, considering how large the new threadripper cpu is
From the image that I have see of the new Threadripper they are about palm size or so, in other words they are larger than what we have known of a normal cpu.. http://www.pcgamer.com/amds-threadripper-is-huge-with-an-equally-large-socket-and-cooler/ .. As you can see in the socket size comparison of the AMD TR4 and Intel's Socket 2066, you can see how massive the Threadripper will be..
On another note after watching a youtube video it seems that Threadripper will supposedly support up to 1TB of ram, just need the board and OS to support that much ram.. lol
Yup I am aware they are larger, I state it in the post you quote; I don't think I'll be needing so much RAM, but for those building servers and running virtual clients for their users then that would be a use.
It's not that you will need 1TB of RAM in the near future... Although, it looks like most of the initial run of motherboards will only support a total of 128GB (That's 8x16GB) probably because that's the largest consumer DDR4 sticks at market right now. Hopefully when 32GB and 64GB sticks come out, the motherboard manufacturers will put out BIOS updates that add support for them.
Ah yeah looking at your post I see what you said, I misread what you said my bad on that part.. And well yeah 1TB ram is overkill for sure at the moment but who knows, what is more exciting though it is OT for this thread, is the second story in that video about Nvidia..
Indeed not, which is why I suggested a use for it (client virtualisation).
I'll probably go with 64GB for my own use, although that is more than I really need.
I have a Quad-Xeon board (64 Cores installed) that supports 2TB of RAM and 11 PCI-e slots (of course this is not your average consumer level piece of hardware). Supporting 1TB+ of RAM is nothing new.
Kendall
...even in the days of DDR3, server boards could support up to 2 TB.
You needed at least Windows Server 2008 Itanium or, 2008 R2 Enterprise/Datacentre edition to make use of that much though.
Or Linux with multiple WIndows VM's running :)
Kendall
And someone to manufacuture DIMMs with a high enough capacity to populate that much memory on a motherboard.
Most servers that support that much RAM use special RAM riser boards. My systems have 4 RAM riser boards (one per CPU) in addition to the onboard RAM slots. 5 of my servers use FB-DIMM DDR2 for up to 1TB and the others use various DDR3 types for up to 2TB. A couple of them also have a special slot next to the PCI-e/PCIx specially dedicated to a RAM card allocated off of the direct CPU bus.
Kendall
For our needs extra ram taking PCIe slots is a big negative, all that will do is rob PCIe lanes from your GPUs. In our current Iray world spending the money on a faster GPU with more VRAM is a much wiser investment. For a threadripper or Epyc build I would probably populate 4x8GB or 8x4GB respectively for the best price vs performance vs size tradeoff.
My workstation is no slouch, It will take 12x16GB DDR3 REG ECC for a total for 192GB With the second CPU riser installed. Though right now I'm eyeballing spending way too much on a Quadro GPU with either 16 or 24GB of VRAM