I do wish though that he would take more of the Stallman approach, and advocate for more open-source activism via tech, especially when it comes to politics and governance. There is so much potential to really improve the environment, social justice, and create a society that prioritizes innovation over greed, but unfortunately it seems like it would take someone like Linus to really push the agenda in the position that he is currently in, rather than wait to see what happens after he is gone, because there will be a lot of disingenuous people that will try to take his place.
DEFCON 19: Bit-squatting: DNS Hijacking Without Exploitation (w speaker)
I have said it before, I'll say it again, it is completely moronic that literally all storage and every bus in your computer uses FEC or at least uses checksums, except main memory and the memory bus.
Also consumers want it that way as ECC needs extra bits and run a few percent slower. If gamers are willing to overclock their CPUs then they probably don't much care for slower memory. And $cost.
I agree with you, but others have different priorities.
(not an intel shill BTW)
Then they can continue to buy and use non-ECC memory
Some Ryzen motherboards are marketed explicitly as having ECC DRAM support (e.g., ASRock Rack X470D4U, ASUS Pro WS X570-ACE).
Other Ryzen motherboards have ECC DRAM support, but they don't advertise it as a feature for one reason or another (most of ASRock's motherboard lineup, many mid-range ASUS motherboards, possibly others).
Still others completely lack ECC support (many low-end boards, as well as high-end gaming-focused boards).
> what does enabled but not validated mean?
Basically, it means that it's optional. As described above, ECC can work or not work depending on which specific motherboard you get, and it's up to the system integrator to choose a motherboard compatible with ECC if that's a desired feature.
That's as opposed to "validated" ECC support in, say, AMD's Threadripper platform. In that case, if a company builds and markets a motherboard as compatible with Threadripper, and it lacks ECC support, they can expect to receive a nasty letter from AMD's legal team.
Are you sure about that? I'm only asking because the System76 Threadripper Thelio doesn't support ECC (according to the response I received from their support people). Their response was actually that "Threadripper and our motherboard do not offer ECC" (TR obviously does support it though), but is it the case that they're actually contractually obligated to support ECC?
 - https://system76.com/cart/configure/thelio-major-r1
The Thelio Major uses a Gigabyte X399 Designare EX motherboard, which has ECC DRAM support. System76 may not offer or support ECC DRAM as an option, but you can add it yourself if you're so inclined.
Incorrect; there were a bunch of AM3(+) boards which advertised ECC support back in the day. The IMC of AMD's desktop processors always supported ECC if I'm not mistaken.
They should be standard consumer features. SEM "sort of" is, but I believe it's not enabled by default on many BIOSes, and SEV is reserved to Epyc. In a time that even Windows 10 has Windows Sandbox and Edge App Guard as consumer-centric virtualization features, supporting virtualization encryption is starting to make more sense. And of course there are all the "pro" people that were already playing with VMs on their machines.
Granted, SEV seems kind of broken/insecure, but I'd still like to see an improvement version coming to consumer Ryzen within the next-generation or two. It coming to Zen 3 chips would probably be ideal, because I don't think AMD will be able to show yet another impressive increase in performance with them, as they will remain on a 7nm process, and Zen 3 itself is supposed to be more of an iteration to Zen 2 anyway. This way at least they can lure people with "more security features", as well as other features like AV1 hardware decoding/encoding support.
You’ll note that the papers were published in 2004 and 2009, respectively.
Here is a paper from 2015 that paints a more accurate picture of hardware used today.
Apparently these studies have strange ways to present data and do not give straight “BER per bit per second”, which I would think is the most useful metric. Without spending all day learning the jargon of this specific field, I think I can conclude, at a glance, that DDR4 has a lower BER than DDR3. The numbers matter, and I don’t know how serious of an issue it is currently. Without that knowledge its impossible to speak on the efficacy of more proliferated ECC in DRAM.
To be fair the single socket, low core count Xeons are not that pricey unless you try to match clock speed with the consumer chips... But, priorities, right?
Someone over there should immediately ship him 3 or 4 badass systems.
The last thing someone on a $10m/yr salary needs is a few “bad ass” systems that they don’t have a use for.
Happened in the past...