Intel vulnerabilities costing 25% CPU performance loss to a cloud provider

Re:Intel vulnerabilities costing 25% CPU performance loss to... by kllrnohj on Friday May 17, 2019 @11:06AM (#19940263)

Threadripper and Ryzen both have ECC support.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel vulnerabilities costing 25% CPU performance loss to... by undersuit on Friday May 17, 2019 @12:29PM (#19941121)

'Registered ECC' is just slightly different than ECC memory, but it's definitely a feature of EPYC, and unsupported on Threadripper and Ryzen.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel vulnerabilities costing 25% CPU performance loss to... by kllrnohj on Friday May 17, 2019 @01:50PM (#19941905)

I cannot find anything at all that supports such a claim. Do you have any links or supporting spec sheets? All I can find are the same "Supports ECC: Yes" listing for Epyc, Threadripper, and Ryzen. The only spec differences I can find for Epyc vs. Threadripper on the memory side of things is 8-channel vs. 4-channel.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel vulnerabilities costing 25% CPU performance loss to... by mizzack on Friday May 17, 2019 @03:10PM (#19942527)

Look at specs for any X399 board and they will say something like "Supports Quad Channel DDR4 3600+(OC) & ECC UDIMM Memory" or "8 x DIMM, Max. 128GB, DDR4 3600(O.C.)... MHz ECC and non-ECC, Un-buffered Memory". Both omit buffered/registered DIMMs.

AM4 boards have similar verbiage.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Intel vulnerabilities costing 25% CPU performance loss to... by undersuit on Friday May 17, 2019 @04:37PM (#19943347)

Here's a document from AMD about EPYC: https://developer.amd.com/wp-content/resources/56301_1.0.pdf

They do not mention unregistered DIMMs being supported.

[ Parent | on HN ]