Will you still use intel?

Demon_Skeith

Administrator
Staff member
Administrator
86,974
2007
4,372
Awards
30
Credits
24,727
Steal Penalty
You're Rich Money Bags Award
Profile Music
Given Intel's huge massive security issue of late, will you still use their brand in the coming future or switch to AMD?
 
I would switch to AMD since they are more secure, and may not suffer from the up to 30% slowdown since a patch is not needed to protect them. AMD CPUs are also more affordable to buy compared to a similar Intel CPU, so I would also be saving money while using an AMD CPU which does not have the Intel Security vulnerability.
 
Intel are the biggest players as far as I know. So they might take a bit of a hit but think they will still be fine. After the patches they'll be the safest place to be as they will be making sure nothing like this happens again.
 
Intel are the biggest players as far as I know. So they might take a bit of a hit but think they will still be fine. After the patches they'll be the safest place to be as they will be making sure nothing like this happens again.

I read a few articles that Intel has to deal with many class action lawsuits from unhappy users. If too many users switch to AMD, and mobile based ARM CPU like the Nvidia Tegra X1 CPU, Intel may become less popular where people see it as some old fashion brand like Nokia, Motorola, Texas Instruments which is not as worth it to buy.

I'll switch to AMD as soon as they finally become more Linux friendly than what they are now.

That is too bad that AMD ignore the Linux userbase, and not work on making AMD more Linux friendly.

The CPU issue also affected AMD CPUs from what I've heard in a late report.

I read reports that AMD deny that their CPU are vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown.
 
I will be switching to ADM as soon as possible for better gaming experience.
 
I think AMD is now the best choice for most gamers since the Intel Meltdown and Spectre security patches are reported on tech blogs to cause random crashes, and slowdown problems in many Intel CPUs.
 
Last edited:
Which amazes me the most, since I have an Intel Core i5 5257-U CPU @ 2.70GHz x 4, I've installed the Linux Kernel with the security patches applied long ago, and I still don't see any difference in performance.
Well, maybe an exception would be that some lighter games no longer cause my laptop fans to spin like crazy as soon as they did before that.
 
Which amazes me the most, since I have an Intel Core i5 5257-U CPU @ 2.70GHz x 4, I've installed the Linux Kernel with the security patches applied long ago, and I still don't see any difference in performance.
Well, maybe an exception would be that some lighter games no longer cause my laptop fans to spin like crazy as soon as they did before that.

I think its a laptop by laptop bases. Some might be affected, others might not.
 
Might also be a developer by developer bases.
Unlike Windows, we Linux users rely on 3rd party hackers for drivers for most of the time.

Could it be that 3rd party hackers did a better job than Intel themselves?
Could it be that Linux can properly handle the security patches whereas Windows can't?
Or is it just luck?
 
Maybe it is harder to publish bad code in Linux because of experienced coders who try harder at stop other less experienced/knowledgeable coders from publishing bad code compared to Intel where their Meltdown and Spectre patches broke many Intel computers, and than Intel told users to stop installing their patches.
 
Last edited:
I will be using it. Well, I have always believed in it....and I like it.

There are ups and downs for everything after all.
 
I recently built my first computer and went with an AMD Ryzen instead of Intel. My reasoning was more for budget but avoiding the security flaws was a nice bonus.
 
Back
Top