News Intel Says Its CPUs Have Fewer New Bugs Than AMD, Nearly Half of GPU Bugs Come From AMD

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
There's no doubt Intel CPUs likely have fewer vulnerabilities than AMD, not in the least because for the better part of this millennium Intel products had a massive market share advantage over AMD and were therefore subject to much more scrutiny by all interested parties.

AMD probably has a number of severe bugs waiting to be discovered, and Intel probably has a few more as well, but in the grand scheme of things the number of CPU vulnerabilities is likely low on the priority list of anyone when it comes to building a machine, be it a home user desktop or multi-million dollar supercomputer, the same way it's low to non existent on people's priority list as to which web browser has fewer bugs or GPU vendor has more bugs in their driver packages.
 
I dont think this is an issue at all. Because Windows + software + network security issues is like 10000x higher. Then vast majority of these exploits require you to sit infront of the computer with admin rights...

The biggest issues have been and always will be windows + software + network..

Lastly, the biggest threat is human... How many security breaches, virus infection etc are simply due to human action?
 
  • Like
Reactions: prtskg
That a bit of a troll press release on Intel's part. I'm pretty sure all AMD fanboys will bring out their pitchforks on reddit about this statement.
Rest assured, that's pretty much what good ol' Pat is counting on, and i'm quite certain he won't be dissapointed. A buzz is a buzz. Maybe Intel is trying too hard to convince us they're the cool kid around the block again. Amusingly enough i don't think that's really necessary at this point, gen12 core CPUs are right on the money. As for the GPU space, only time will tell if their discreet gpu's end up in the traditional prebuilt school pc segment or they'll actually produce a formindable gaming gpu for the first time after decades of misfires and aborts
 
I hope that Intel starting up the aggressive marketing machine is a sign that they know the supply chain issues are about to be fixed and consumers will be eager to buy at the normal price levels.
 
Maybe they should produce a report that takes into account the severity of the bug. E.g. multiply the number of bugs of each sev level (1-10) by the sev level and add them all together.

Oh, and make it a line graph going back, say, 4 years ? So we can see trends over time.
 
hotaru251 said:
Not sure they wanna go this route..

AMD has more? sure
Intel has fewer? fine.

Now...who has more impactful bugs and which CPU maker fixes cripple performance?

[sips tea]

also its not a shock about gpu related ones given amd's weakness is their gpu department.
Click to expand...
AMD's weakness in GPU? More like, the fact that Intel's GPU haven't changed in 6 years while AMD created 4 new architectures in that area : Polaris, Vega, RDNA1 and RDNA2.
 
  • Like
Reactions: King_V and Deleted member 14196
mitch074 said:
AMD's weakness in GPU? More like, the fact that Intel's GPU haven't changed in 6 years while AMD created 4 new architectures in that area : Polaris, Vega, RDNA1 and RDNA2.
Click to expand...

And yet AMD has never managed to make a meanigful impact whith any of those architectures. In fact the last time they ( before ATI was bought by AMD) really managed to pull the rug under Nvidia was the R300 series ( R9500,R9700,R9800 ). And that came out 20 years ago.

Back in 2006 when AMD purchased ATI, it has proven to be too much to chew for AMD. The aquistion itself nearly bankrupted AMD, RnD was cut quite significantly on both CPU and GPU segments. It took AMD almost another 15 years come back from that.

In the end AMD does make the best APUs on the market, but when it comes to discreet GPUs they're just good enough.

As for lack of support for AMD features, there's a simple reason for it. Lackluster developer support. As developer reaching out to AMD for support you get ping ponged between departments and spend days on something that should have taken hours to resolved. For all shenigans Nvidia pulled at us over the years, they have this area covered rather well.
 
Hahahaha. Right Intel. Keep lying to yourself ya goons

intel GPUs are garbage so they have no ammo there either
 
So Intel has finally fixed its meltdown etc bugs? That would be nice 😉
So this is marketing, and we don´t forget that Intel cpus have had their fair share of bugs and vulnerabilities.

What we learn about this. We should be aware of the bugs and expect companies to fix then in timely manner, because every product have some...
 
I'm a little suspicious on these numbers given they only show those bugs found internally and in Bug Bounty research. There have been mulitple external research facilities that refused to join the Bug Bounty program because it allows Intel to decide when to publish the findings, if at all.
 
Bazzy 505 said:
And yet AMD has never managed to make a meanigful impact whith any of those architectures. In fact the last time they ( before ATI was bought by AMD) really managed to pull the rug under Nvidia was the R300 series ( R9500,R9700,R9800 ). And that came out 20 years ago.

Back in 2006 when AMD purchased ATI, it has proven to be too much to chew for AMD. The aquistion itself nearly bankrupted AMD, RnD was cut quite significantly on both CPU and GPU segments. It took AMD almost another 15 years come back from that.

In the end AMD does make the best APUs on the market, but when it comes to discreet GPUs they're just good enough.

As for lack of support for AMD features, there's a simple reason for it. Lackluster developer support. As developer reaching out to AMD for support you get ping ponged between departments and spend days on something that should have taken hours to resolved. For all shenigans Nvidia pulled at us over the years, they have this area covered rather well.
Click to expand...
You may have missed that the Radeon 6000 series, with the exception of the 6500 4-PCI Express lane junk have been very very competitive with NVIDIA across the board. The only place NVIDIA has a clear advantage is in ray tracing performance at this point.
 
mitch074 said:
AMD's weakness in GPU? More like, the fact that Intel's GPU haven't changed in 6 years while AMD created 4 new architectures in that area : Polaris, Vega, RDNA1 and RDNA2.
Click to expand...
to which Nvidia has never once in that time lost in performance.

amd's top gpu atm "can" beat 3090 in some stuff (which will lose to 3090 ti), but overall? it loses and for gaming nvidia's software benefits are overall better than AMD's and graphic driver support? That is truly AMD's weakest spot.

not saying amd's gpus are "bad" in the general sense (as i mean they arent) however you can't deny they lack the mojo their CPU side has.
 
hotaru251 said:
to which Nvidia has never once in that time lost in performance.

amd's top gpu atm "can" beat 3090 in some stuff (which will lose to 3090 ti), but overall? it loses and for gaming nvidia's software benefits are overall better than AMD's and graphic driver support? That is truly AMD's weakest spot.

not saying amd's gpus are "bad" in the general sense (as i mean they arent) however you can't deny they lack the mojo their CPU side has.
Click to expand...
AMD has never burned your cards though... 😀

Regards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mitch074 and hotaru251
Wow I'm happy there are current comments, unlike the last few. I mean I get it with the Intel 12400 vs AMD 5600X comparison, comments were disabled.

In that article it shows on the graphs the 12400 at "stock PL" is faster than the 5600x however Paul Alcorn failed to point out that those results are not stock, instead the results are with the turbo duration almost doubled (56 seconds is stock to 128 seconds shown as "stock PL"), but again didn't say so. Also the stock cooler having to be replaced with a better more expensive cooler to be able to cool the 12400 with no power limits. I like many others did notice you used the same numbers from the original 12400 review where that detail is mentioned.
 
USAFRet said:
It was going to come out anyway.

Fanboys on either side will spin it to their clicky advantage.

"AMD has moar!"
"Intels are worse!"

Whatever...
Click to expand...

Some of Intel's bugs have overall been more egregious because they were remotely exploitable. When AMD and Intel shared vulnerabilities, AMDs required physical access. That is a not an insignificant difference. Like being able to expose tpm keys by remote polling. The level at which any of these would be exploited would be a high level targeted attack. In AMDs case that would mean something like getting a VM on the same box as the intended target. Or stealing the whole box. For Intel's best case you could basically just exploit any client on the same network. Worse case, directly over the internet. Don't have be a fanboy to see those are not insignificant differences.
 
The broken "record" from INTEL is just a continuation of the ongoing SWAN SONG from the previous admin. Intel loves to have the LAST dance as they step on the toes of the truth. INTEL has lost their credibility with me years long ago. All sad to say!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom