Is Intel Trustworthy

After reading the linked ZDNet article, please vote your choice.

https://www.zdnet.com/article/intel-...ectre-patches/

According to ZDNet’s article, a new clause within Intel’s software license agreement is what seems to be a move to legally gag developers from revealing performance degradation by its mitigations for Spectre and Foreshadow:

The chip maker argued when it disclosed L1FT that "there has been no meaningful performance impact observed as a result of mitigations applied" to PCs or datacenter equipment. (bolding and color added)

If this is so, why then, is the new clause included in Intel’s license?

3. LICENSE RESTRICTIONS…
Unless expressly permitted under the Agreement, You will not, and will not allow any third party to(i)use, copy, distribute, sell or offer to sell the Software or associated documentation; (ii) modify, adapt, enhance, disassemble, decompile, reverse engineer, change or create derivative works from the Software except and only to the extent as specifically required by mandatory applicable laws or any applicable third party license terms accompanying the Software; (iii) use or make the Software available for the use or benefit of third parties; or (iv) use the Software on Your products other than those that include the Intel hardware product(s), platform(s), or software identified in the Software; or (v) publish or provide any Software benchmark or comparison test results… (bolding and color added)

Says they're changing the terms now, after it was brought to their attention.....I'll be undecided until I see what that change actually comes out to be. But, sure seems like they're hiding something, doesn't it?

simrick said:

Says they're changing the terms now, after it was brought to their attention.....I'll be undecided until I see what that change actually comes out to be. But, sure seems like they're hiding something, doesn't it?

What worries me is that if they leave the "fix" in place, a processor that ran at X GB and if it now runs at -y GB, their processor speed is now less than what they thought they bought.

All companies push the boundaries.. but a previous post of mine regarding Intel's shenanigans was deleted.. so suffice to say "Nope"

Superfly said:

All companies push the boundaries.. but a previous post of mine regarding Intel's shenanigans was deleted.. so suffice to say "Nope"

Understatement of the year....(sorry I missed that post....)

I don't trust Intel. They say some of their HD Graphics don't support Windows 7 / Windows 8.1 But you have to add a few lines of code to the driver and it works perfectly fine.

Intel's Management Engine is a security hazard, and users need a way to disable it

Trust big corporations to owe to their errors !!! Yeah right !!!

eLPuSHeR said:

I don't think Intel is worse than any other big corporation out there but after the Spectre/Meltdown big fiasco I am considering my next pc to be AMD (Ryzen). I know AMD processors are also affected but to me AMD seems like more straightforward than Intel.

It all started from performance improvement Intel has installed in their chips while AMD didn't and that's why Intel processors had better memory and single thread performance comparing to AMD's FX (Bulldozer) processors. It's reasonable to expect lower performance once that advantage was removed. Thing is that it doesn't affect all software but only those that take advantage of those features.