KB4100347 Intel microcode updates for Windows 10 v1803 - January 8 Win Update

All these updates are getting crazy. I really do not know for sure where I am in this whole update merry-go-round.

Still no 0x2B uCode in 17754.1

khanmein said:

@MUser The performance became slower.

Hi,
Mine shows fast
Loose about 200 points in time spy and about 50 on Heaven benchmarks.
Disabling the updates with inspectre helps.

ThrashZone said:

Hi,
Mine shows fast
Loose about 200 points in time spy and about 50 on Heaven benchmarks.
Disabling the updates with inspectre helps.

You mean GOOD? I dont think there is a FAST in InSpectre shown.

Can anyone please clarify, if this update from today hast performance impact? Should I deinstall it? Wasnt this update optional so far? I dont really want or need the slow down MC updates on my laptop or tablet.

gorgor said:

You mean GOOD? I dont think there is a FAST in InSpectre shown.

Can anyone please clarify, if this update from today hast performance impact? Should I deinstall it? Wasnt this update optional so far? I dont really want or need the slow down MC updates on my laptop or tablet.

Why do people ask if there is a performance impact? Spectre variants 2, 3, 3a and 4 mitigations all use uCode. There will be a performance impact. Whether you do or use anything that will be affected is impossible to predict.

It's like asking "will my car go slower if I have the sunroof open?" Yes, of course it will, because of the drag. If you don't open it, or don't try for topspeed, you will never notice. If it rains, you will get wet.

I think that's the best analogy to date, I'm going to sit back and be smug for a while.

gorgor said:

You mean GOOD? I dont think there is a FAST in InSpectre shown.

Can anyone please clarify, if this update from today hast performance impact? Should I deinstall it? Wasnt this update optional so far? I dont really want or need the slow down MC updates on my laptop or tablet.

Hi,
Yes my bad Good

Impact is minimal you can always disable it and melt down impacts.

Just installed it on my laptop and did a CrystalDiskMark after reboot, and this new MC update has a catastrophical ANOTHER 50% impact on my Samsung 970 Evo 500GB:

Before (23.08.2018)
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 3511.899 MB/s Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 2493.400 MB/s Random Read 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1069.782 MB/s [ 261177.2 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1605.116 MB/s [ 391874.0 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 308.759 MB/s [ 75380.6 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 493.769 MB/s [ 120549.1 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 38.656 MB/s [ 9437.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 94.370 MB/s [ 23039.6 IOPS]

Today:
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 3439.877 MB/s Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 2492.474 MB/s Random Read 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1013.286 MB/s [ 247384.3 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 876.680 MB/s [ 214033.2 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 301.853 MB/s [ 73694.6 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 257.336 MB/s [ 62826.2 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 40.152 MB/s [ 9802.7 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 95.270 MB/s [ 23259.3 IOPS]

gorgor said:

Just installed it on my laptop and did a CrystalDiskMark after reboot, and this new MC update has a catastrophical ANOTHER 50% impact on my Samsung 970 Evo 500GB:

Before (23.08.2018)
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 3511.899 MB/s Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 2493.400 MB/s Random Read 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1069.782 MB/s [ 261177.2 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1605.116 MB/s [ 391874.0 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 308.759 MB/s [ 75380.6 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 493.769 MB/s [ 120549.1 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 38.656 MB/s [ 9437.5 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 94.370 MB/s [ 23039.6 IOPS]

Today:
Sequential Read (Q= 32,T= 1) : 3439.877 MB/s Sequential Write (Q= 32,T= 1) : 2492.474 MB/s Random Read 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 1013.286 MB/s [ 247384.3 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 8,T= 8) : 876.680 MB/s [ 214033.2 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 301.853 MB/s [ 73694.6 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 32,T= 1) : 257.336 MB/s [ 62826.2 IOPS] Random Read 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 40.152 MB/s [ 9802.7 IOPS] Random Write 4KiB (Q= 1,T= 1) : 95.270 MB/s [ 23259.3 IOPS]

So, those numbers are still way better than SATA-III SSD. The uCode isn't going to be revised, so you either want the protection from Spectre variants or you don't. Moaning about a performance impact in a benchmark has zero impact in system usability. People get real.

winactive said:

So, those numbers are still way better than SATA-III SSD. The uCode isn't going to be revised, so you either want the protection from Spectre variants or you don't. Moaning about a performance impact in a benchmark has zero impact in system usability. People get real.

... just.... NOT.... TRUE. People have no idea what theyre talking about. It has a terrible impact on performance because these "benchmarks" are an image of real-life work scenarios, like... installing programs, DEARCHIVE archives (aka zip/rar)... it is a difference between writing in KB/s versus MB/s. Opening large IDEs, browsing through folders with hundreds or thousands of files, especially pictures in Explorer, starting a game which uses BLOB files. If I dearchive a zip file with thousands of small files, the write speed goes down to like 200Kb/s instead of 2-3Mb/s.

gorgor said:

... just.... NOT.... TRUE. People have no idea what theyre talking about. It has a terrible impact on performance because these "benchmarks" are an image of real-life work scenarios, like... installing programs, DEARCHIVE archives (aka zip/rar)... it is a difference between writing in KB/s versus MB/s. Opening large IDEs, browsing through folders with hundreds or thousands of files, especially pictures in Explorer, starting a game which uses BLOB files. If I dearchive a zip file with thousands of small files, the write speed goes down to like 200Kb/s instead of 2-3Mb/s.

It's not. Post video of such a decompression, I dare you.