Talk:Rocket Lake

Latest comment: 3 years ago by Artem S. Tashkinov in topic Addressing Meltdown/Spectre

Notability

edit

User:Kj cheetham, there's sources out there, so curious why you would nom? Widefox; talk 09:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Looking at things more carefully today, I'd have withdrawn the nom myself anyway to be honest. -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:29, 20 July 2020 (UTC)Reply
It is irresponsible to list "The Rocket Lake cores contain significantly more transistors than current Skylake-derived Comet Lake cores" when no sources are cited and Intel doesn't release transistor counts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 40.133.174.198 (talk) 07:28, 23 December 2020 (UTC)Reply
edit

The edition from 02:16, December 20, 2020‎ by 85.249.193.21 added a meaningless line after article content with a link to third party website that looks suspicious, possibly promotional or fishing. I'm not an editor so I don't know how to properly remove or hide it but I wanted to raise editors' attention to this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avatar(DS) (talkcontribs) 21:35, 27 December 2020 (UTC)Reply

I reverted this 24 December 2020 edit by 103.104.114.71 which looks like EXT spam. Widefox; talk 16:42, 21 February 2021 (UTC)Reply


Addressing Meltdown/Spectre

edit

Does anyone know if Intel has finally managed to fully address in hardware the various Meltdown/Spectre variants? This would be a good category to tag against all the older "Lakes" as well as this one and any new ones until they finally get it right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.156.255.250 (talk) 02:08, 19 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Spectre class vulnerabilities are impossible to fix in HW, Meltdown has been fixed for several generations already. Also check Transient execution CPU vulnerabilities Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 11:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)Reply