Intel says it had half the number of bugs in its CPUs as AMD last year

midian182

Posts: 7,919   +82
Staff member
What just happened? Intel’s public offensive against AMD has grown more intense recently. The latest diss from team blue is found in a report that states its CPUs faced 16 reported vulnerabilities last year while almost double that amount (31) were found in AMD’s processors. Intel did lead the way in GPU vulnerabilities, but it’s placing the blame for that stat on its rival.

Intel’s 2021 product security report starts by revealing that the company delivered mitigations for 226 product security issues last year, of which 113 (50%) were found internally by Intel employees, and 97 (43%) were reported through its bug bounty program.

One section of the report compares Intel and AMD Common Vulnerabilities and Exposure (CVE) counts. Of the 16 CPU vulnerabilities Intel reported in 2021, 10 were discovered internally, and six came from bug bounties. It lists AMD as having discovered 31 CPU vulnerabilities, all of which are classed as coming from “external” research.

When it came to GPUs, there were a massive 51 Intel vulnerabilities reported—15 internal and 36 from bug bounties. AMD had just 27. However, Intel does have its own caveat: the CVE INTEL-SA-00481 for Intel Core Processors with Radeon RX Vega M graphics contains 23 vulnerabilities affecting AMD components. Tom’s Hardware notes that these appear to be for the Kaby Lake-G processors that combined Intel’s 8th-gen CPU and AMD’s Radeon Vega GPU onto a single piece of silicon. They were famously used in Intel’s Kaby Lake G NUC, known as Hades Canyon, and the Dell XPS 15 2-in-1.

Intel also notes that it did not find any AMD-published CVEs in 2021 attributed to the company’s internal research—all information in the report is based on AMD CVEs that came from external research.

Earlier this week, Intel expanded its bug bounty program with a group of elite hackers under the Project Circuit Breaker banner. We’ve also seen CEO Pat Gelsinger throw shade at AMD recently, claiming the company is “in the rearview mirror” following the success of Alder Lake.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 2,212   +4,262
It's funny to see intel try and get people to forget Spectre and Meltdown with crap like this.

The sad part is that it probably will work for some large corporate and data center customers that could have been thinking about finally switching to AMD but are too conservative: intel only needs the surface appearance of being ahead of tech and ahead on security for a tiny little while to secure another long term contract with them.
 

Nanochip

Posts: 66   +110
At least it seems that they're taking security into account. Spectre and meltdown mitigations decreased the performance of my Skylake chip... by a few percentage points. Skylake was damn fast relative to the Core 2 Duo that I had before it... but Intel stagnated for years following Skylake on endless 14nm iterations. Stuck in a while loop. But Alder Lake brings good performance, so good to see the effects of Zen3 and Apple M1 Max competition...
 

rmcrys

Posts: 162   +140
It's funny to see intel try and get people to forget Spectre and Meltdown with crap like this.

The sad part is that it probably will work for some large corporate and data center customers that could have been thinking about finally switching to AMD but are too conservative: intel only needs the surface appearance of being ahead of tech and ahead on security for a tiny little while to secure another long term contract with them.

Sadly most people have zero idea that those issues even existed and they only knowledge that with windows updates the CPU is slower.

At the end, for 95% of the people the fault is on Microsoft's. A reason more to buy the newest chip...

Personally I'll wait and watch for a couple of gen more, tech is too expensive right now and doesn't really bring anything new. The only tech I am considering is the steam deck
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 7,707   +6,654
Sadly most people have zero idea that those issues even existed and they only knowledge that with windows updates the CPU is slower.

At the end, for 95% of the people the fault is on Microsoft's. A reason more to buy the newest chip...

Personally I'll wait and watch for a couple of gen more, tech is too expensive right now and doesn't really bring anything new. The only tech I am considering is the steam deck
I'm waiting, too. However, I doubt I will go back to Intel. I've built mostly with AMD with one exception - a Sandy Bridge based PC when Sandy Bridge was new; however, I won't go back to sIntel - I'm waiting for AM5 and will build when that comes out.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,665   +1,322
It's funny to see intel try and get people to forget Spectre and Meltdown with crap like this.
Neither Spectre or Meltdown were bugs. CPU worked just as it was supposed (and documented) to work. Too bad, it allowed some side channel attacks but that was not bug.
 

BigRedPDX

Posts: 271   +191
Neither Spectre or Meltdown were bugs. CPU worked just as it was supposed (and documented) to work. Too bad, it allowed some side channel attacks but that was not bug.
They are vulnerabilities, which is different than a bug. For bug testing, both are used interchangeably. That's just the matter of fact. Either way, they are big vulnerabilities.
 

nnguy2

Posts: 426   +898
tumblr_nsw1nnlmRw1rvnnvyo2_500.jpg
 

Beerfloat

Posts: 512   +976
I like how Pat's Intel is no longer all high and mighty and now scrappy enough to just outright troll the AMD jehovas with some harsh truths.
 

umbala

Posts: 605   +1,013
Yes, and in the previous years, Intel beat all the records for bugs and security flaws.
Hey, no fair! You can only quote years and numbers which are favorable to Intel.

Also, the new Intel CEO is hilarious. He looks like a reverse Stephen Hawking: healthy body, sh*t for brains.
 

Watzupken

Posts: 608   +505
From a bug perspective, I tend to feel that AMD's platform is certainly not as refined as Intel. At least during my testing with the R7 5800X. The most vivid one that is quite annoying was the USB bug. Having said that, Intel is not exactly bug free as most reviewers have identified issues with Rocket Lake due to the rushed product release.
From a security standpoint, I think Intel is missing the point. It is not the number that counts. Rather, it is the severity that matters. And from what I observed in news, Intel tend to be one of those affected by high profile vulnerabilities which is not good, especially if they are trying to convince enterprise to use their product.
Also, I feel Pat's attack on AMD by means of his remarks and marketing is not going to help them win all the lost customers/ businesses back. If AMD is really bad, most big corporates will just invest in their custom CPUs. Most companies will not want to put all their eggs in one basket since Intel used to charge them an arm and a leg for these enterprise/ DC grade systems. And as we looked back in the past few years, all of them seems to be affected by very severe vulnerabilities. AMD is offering a cheaper alternative to Intel, but I feel it is ARM that has benefited the most from Intel's missteps.
 

theruck

Posts: 548   +345
So intel now talks security huh? look how many CVEs exist for the bloatware Intel rapid storage
 

FF222

Posts: 296   +277
Well, thank to this article, at least we now know that the author's user name is "midia" on his computer. For everything else we have to go to Intel's website and search for the actual document he failed to link to correctly.
 

Art5performance

Posts: 18   +7
Intel probarbly also count the bugs with Windows 11 , which microsoft forgot to write the L3 cache right, which costs a lot off operating power of the the ryzen chips....

but yeah , make AMD look foolish.... Great PR .... #not.

You need to win clients/fans , with pure performance , support of your product , not by bullying the opponent. Really a bad move.

Went to the ryzen camp last year , next CPU for now is going to AMD again.