• M0oP0o@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think a spot that might land them in a bit of hot water will be what specs they use for the chips after the “fix”. Will they update the specs to reflect the now slower speeds? My money would be them still listing the full chooch chip killing specs.

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      If people bought it at one spec and now it’s lower, that could be enough. It would have made the decision different at purchase time.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        It would be breach of implied warranty/false advertisement if they keep selling them with the old specs at least.

    • floofloof@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It has been wise for years to subtract 15-20% off Intel’s initial performance claims and benchmarks at release. Spectre and Meltdown come to mind, for example. There’s always some post-release patch that hobbles the performance, even when the processors are stable. Intel’s corporate culture is to push the envelope just a little too far then walk it back quietly after the initial positive media coverage is taken care of.

      • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yes, but lucky for some of us that practice is still illegal in parts of the world. I just don’t get why they still get away with it (they do get fines but the over all practice is still normalized).

        I sure would not want any 13 or 14 gen Intel in any equipment I was responsible for. Think of the risk over any IT departments head with these CPUs in production, you would never really trust them again.