Is hyperthreading permanently kill or will there by software mitigations that allow it to be turned on again down the...

Is hyperthreading permanently kill or will there by software mitigations that allow it to be turned on again down the line?

Attached: DcS8BfbVAAAARkA.jpg (1024x679, 52K)

>the state of Inlelfags

who cares

Who is actually paranoid enough to turn off hyperthreading?

I would if I bought a piece of shit intlel

There are already hardware mitigations in cascade lake.

Its flawed at the hardware level, if they fix it maybe. Realistically they'll just continue to lie and have a massive shill force, it doesn't make sense that so many are lying about it like its not a issue.
If you have a Intel processor and its network connected just don't do anything important on the machine, treat it like a public machine that has a like a key logger or worse on it. I don't recommend buying one.

hyperthread's not dead, there are, or will be, ways to mitigate zombieload without disabling it

people with high security needs who can't wait for proper mitigations

And keep your foil hat on so the jews can't use 5G to beam multiculturalism into your brain.

!Na'kumbe x!tumgo my friend

AMD still has hyperthreading

Attached: 1527629778452.jpg (679x758, 54K)

I leave it on because I don't care

i'm sure you're okay with your bank not patching any of the 32+ intel hardware security vulnerabilities

Attached: 1558604525133.png (593x580, 621K)

yes, buy new CPU goyim

there will be more hardware security vulnerabilities for intel anyway so buying a new intel CPU after these exploits is fucking retarded.

buy AMD epyc or ryzen if you care about security and privacy

>people with high security needs
you shouldn't be using x86 then, they're all cucked.
You can easily just buy another CPU. an AMD board + AMD CPU is all you'd need, the rest of your system can work with it just fine.

Is that a pic of Straw Man?
As the guy you're replying to meant end-users like you and me, who do basic programming and shit post on Jow Forums

>implying gamers have any money
>their parents buy all their games and they probably use their own iphones for business use

1 Taiwanese dollar has been deposited into your account

how does a company with all the most advanced researchers and engineers fail this hard?

This.
My 4 cores 4 threads Incel CPU doesn't have hipsterthreading

I mean, I play games and I have money. I’ll also probably buy a new intel chip if they fix vulnerabilities. I know you guys will shit on me for saying that but intel has a plant near me and it would hurt the area a lot if it got closed down so I try and support them when I can. A lot of people don’t realize how important a company like that that brings money in is. So many other jobs depend on it, or partially depend on it. If it was a ford plant I’d probably buy ford even though I generally don’t like them.

lmai ive disabled all mitigation shit 2 days ago, feels good

I got a shit business selling 8350/650 ti based pre builts for $1500 each. Want to support it?.

Buy *NEW* Intel CPU goyim, buy buy buy

>implying gamers have any money
delid dis

Attached: 1497883390389.jpg (267x297, 18K)

If OS and hypervisor schedulers can stop attacker processes/VMs and victim processes/VMs from running in parallel on the same core then hyperthreading won't need to be disabled entirely.

I genuinely don't know whether my 6700k has ever benefited from having hyperthreading.

How are intel not being sued by class action? Surely compensation is due to those deceived into buying products with Intel chips in them?

Attached: intel.jpg (3840x1080, 2.8M)

>want to buy CPU
>i5 or i7
>i7 has the same number of cores as the i5, just has some Jewish magic to make it pretend to have double the cores
>think to myself that sounds like nonsense, there's no way that actually works. I'll go for the i5
>Mfw

Attached: 1550507557929.png (888x894, 520K)

It needs to be disabled as part of mitigations but intel won't disable it in microcode updates and will still advertise it as a feature. They simply say "disable it yourself". So that's how they plan to keep it relevant.

HYPER

Attached: HYPER.png (825x816, 99K)

Does your business almost entirely prop up the economy where I live?

Dunno but they'll probably fix it with the 10XXX series

yes. I'm a jew, just trust me

Cores are pretty vaguely defined
FX CPUs can be argued as 2/3/4-core CPUs with SMT instead of 8/6/4. Current console APUs can be argued as dual core with 4 threads per core.

Hyperthreading and SMT just mean that 2 ALUs (what actually does the processing) share a cache.
So it's more of less double the cores with half of the resources per core.

You guys keep trying to insinuate that talking about widely known and documented fact is somehow crazy, like there's some conspiracy.
No one should buy Intel anything for network use, it is fundamentally flawed at the hardware level.

There is "hardware mitigations" or so Intel says for very old vulnerabilities but none of the newer ones, none of the vulnerabilities that haven't been disclosed, or none of the vulnerabilities that haven't been discovered yet.

Just don't use hyperthreading while navigating on the internet.

servers which provide virtual machines and thus run untrusted software
on desktop there are far better attack surface than leaking kernel data