this post was submitted on 05 Jan 2026
635 points (99.7% liked)

PC Gaming

13135 readers
768 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] wccrawford@discuss.online 37 points 5 days ago (1 children)

All of the exploits against Intel processors didn't help either. Not only is it a bad look, but the fixes reduced the speed of the those processors, making them quite a bit worse deal for the money after all.

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 19 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Meltdown and Spectre? Those also applied to AMD CPUs as well, just to a lesser degree (or rather, they had their own flavor of similar vulnerabilities). I think they even recently found a similar one for ARM chips...

[–] fuckwit_mcbumcrumble@lemmy.dbzer0.com 17 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Only one affected AMD, forget which. But Intel knew about the vulnerabilities, but chose not to fix the hardware ahead of their release.

[–] MotoAsh@piefed.social 6 points 5 days ago

Yea that definitely sounds like Intel... Though it's still worth pointing out that one of them was a novel way to spy on program memory that affects many CPU types and not really indicative of a dropped ball. (outside of shipping with known vulnerabilities, anyways)

... The power stuff from 12/13th gens or what ever though... ouch, massive dropped ball.