I’m afraid, this seems to be correct:
pluto:~ # inxi -Ca
CPU:
Info: model: Intel Core i7-8550U socket: BGA1356 (U3E1) note: check bits: 64
type: MT MCP arch: Coffee Lake gen: core 8 level: v3 note: check built: 2017
process: Intel 14nm family: 6 model-id: 0x8E (142) stepping: 0xA (10)
microcode: 0xF6
Topology: cpus: 1x cores: 4 tpc: 2 threads: 8 smt: enabled cache:
L1: 256 KiB desc: d-4x32 KiB; i-4x32 KiB L2: 1024 KiB desc: 4x256 KiB
L3: 8 MiB desc: 1x8 MiB
Speed (MHz): avg: 1075 high: 1473 min/max: 400/1800 base/boost: 2700/8300
scaling: driver: intel_pstate governor: powersave volts: 0.9 V
ext-clock: 100 MHz cores: 1: 1445 2: 1473 3: 832 4: 814 5: 954 6: 875
7: 1101 8: 1109 bogomips: 31999
Flags: avx avx2 ht lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx
Inxi confirms level 3 on my laptop. It’s not too old, I’m ready to believe it.
But then…
pluto:~ # lscpu | grep sse4_3
pluto:~ # lscpu | grep sse4_2
Markierungen: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx pdpe1gb rdtscp lm constant_tsc art arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl xtopology nonstop_tsc cpuid aperfmperf pni pclmulqdq dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 sdbg fma cx16 xtpr pdcm pcid sse4_1 sse4_2 x2apic movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes xsave avx f16c rdrand lahf_lm abm 3dnowprefetch cpuid_fault epb invpcid_single pti ssbd ibrs ibpb stibp tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept vpid ept_ad fsgsbase tsc_adjust bmi1 avx2 smep bmi2 erms invpcid mpx rdseed adx smap clflushopt intel_pt xsaveopt xsavec xgetbv1 xsaves dtherm arat pln pts hwp hwp_notify hwp_act_window hwp_epp md_clear flush_l1d arch_capabilities
pluto:~ #
Well, it’s not yet a problem, level 2 is still fine, but still a bit unsettling.
A sidenote: My homeserver I thought to be dying is still running, just due to a lack of a) time and b) disaster. Now, I assume it’s realling doomed:
kasi@lanserv:~> inxi -Ca
CPU:
Info: model: AMD Athlon II X2 250 bits: 64 type: MCP arch: K10 level: v1
built: 2009-13 process: AMD 45nm family: 0x10 (16) model-id: 6 stepping: 2
microcode: 0x1000098
Topology: cpus: 1x cores: 2 smt: <unsupported> cache: L1: 256 KiB
desc: d-2x64 KiB; i-2x64 KiB L2: 2 MiB desc: 2x1024 KiB
Speed (MHz): avg: 800 min/max: 800/3000 boost: disabled scaling:
driver: acpi-cpufreq governor: ondemand cores: 1: 800 2: 800 bogomips: 12054
Flags: ht lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4a svm
It’s doing its job and I’d prefer to keep it running for sake of sustainability and - even more - bother. However, I do understand the points mentionend against it.
Just out of interest, for my understanding:
If it can be done for Tumbleweed using whcaps, I assume it could be done for Leap. It’s not being done
Right?
This is really meant without any judgement. I’m not in the position to step up and give a lot of support for testing, I just can’t. In a few hours, I’m going to leave for my next business trip to India, Thailand and Taiwan. The issue here prevented me from upgrading my laptop. When I was ready to start, a productive (Win 11) machine of my wife’s office took priority seriously, followed by my laptop choosing this time suitable for a fatal hardware failure. It freezes even in the EFI menu.
Well, when I get back home, spring time is going to loom. Hm, Winter is my computer fixing time. I’ll be glad to get everything back to status quo and forget about anything I was planning to accomplish before gardening season keeps me outside for about 8 months.
Sorry, for the prose. I just thought of adding that being able to maintain stuff as long as possible has it’s perk. 
(The main point was about inxi vs. lscpu.)
kasi