| 1 |
On 01/09/2018 01:56 AM, Mick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday, 8 January 2018 17:47:03 GMT Corbin Bird wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 01/07/2018 02:46 PM, Taiidan@×××.com wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> I have several sandy/ivybridge CPU's and I was wondering if anyone |
| 5 |
>>> knows as to if intel is releasing microcode updates for them. |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> It sure would be funny if intel wanted you to buy a new CPU to fix a |
| 8 |
>>> problem that was their fault to begin with. |
| 9 |
>> Do you remember the x87 bugs discovered in the original i586 Pentiums? |
| 10 |
>> Never fixed. |
| 11 |
>> Still built into every Intel CPU. |
| 12 |
>> Intel does NOT replace "defective-by-design" hardware. |
| 13 |
>> Instead, every OS is required to "software emulate" the FPU. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> Search for "errata-not-bug". |
| 16 |
>> Intel's term for their screw-ups in their CPUs. |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> Intel is only releasing patch code for the last five years of products. |
| 19 |
>> |
| 20 |
>> And ... if you read up on the "e-mails" being posted ... |
| 21 |
>> ... It looks as if Intel is NOT going to fix this in future CPUs either. |
| 22 |
>> Instead, every OS will be required to "work-around-this". |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> Perhaps the reason "someone" tried to implicate this effects ALL CPU |
| 25 |
>> architectures? |
| 26 |
>> ( IBM RISC 6000, PowerPC, DEC Alpha, IBM System/390, Sun SPARC64, for |
| 27 |
>> example ) |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> Intel did try to make their "patch" mandatory for AMD CPUs ( with NO |
| 30 |
>> disable switch ). |
| 31 |
>> Why? |
| 32 |
>> Think about it. |
| 33 |
>> |
| 34 |
>> Corbin |
| 35 |
> So what affordable and available CPUs should one be looking into for a new |
| 36 |
> desktop build? |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Also, laptops? |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
At this point, the only sure bet, is a non x86, x86_64, ARM, ARM64 CPU. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Don't know enough to make a recommendation on a particular CPU arch at |
| 44 |
this point. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Try asking Taiidan@×××.com or Ian Zimmerman ( both on gentoo-users |
| 47 |
mailing list ) about PPC/PPC64. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
Re-post of saved e-mail : |
| 50 |
> On 12/25/2017 06:33 PM, Ian Zimmerman wrote: |
| 51 |
> |
| 52 |
>> On 2017-12-24 14:44, Taiidan@×××.com wrote: |
| 53 |
>> |
| 54 |
>>> POWER 9: TALOS 2 (server/workstation, brand new and very high |
| 55 |
>>> performance - the only brand new hardware that is legitimately libre) |
| 56 |
>> This is interesting, but can it run gentoo? There's a handbook edition |
| 57 |
>> for PPC64, but that's not quite the same, is it? |
| 58 |
> It is. |
| 59 |
> PPC64 is big endian, PPC64LE is little endian. |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> POWER8/9 are Bi-Endian so you can use both (most linux distros only |
| 62 |
> support little) |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> PPC64 compile covers PowerPC and POWER. |
| 65 |
> |
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
> TALOS 2 is an end user obtainable derivative of the Romulus POWER 9 |
| 68 |
> development board, there are a variety of modifications and it is more |
| 69 |
> open source than Romulus - you can also pay for it with bitcoin. |
| 70 |
> It supports dual sforza CPU's which have up to 24 cores per socket |
| 71 |
> with SMT4 (4 threads at the same time per core) |
Archives