Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 17th Jun 2009 22:36 UTC
Intel Personally, I've always been very confused by Intel's processor branding. Core Duo and Core Solo were pretty straightforward, but not long after we were dealing with Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Quad, which is anything but marketing friendly. Apparently, Intel agrees with us and has announced a fairly massive branding overhaul.
Permalink for comment 369212
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Makes Less Sense
by Hae-Yu on Thu 18th Jun 2009 18:00 UTC
Hae-Yu
Member since:
2006-01-12

I don't know if this helps me any better than the current system.

On the desktop, they will have Celeron ("good"), Pentium ("better") and Core ("best"). Nothing changed there. To the Core they now have i3 ("entry-level"), i5 ("mid-level"), and i7 ("high-end").

Celeron is the good, affordable entry level platform and Core i3 is the best entry-level platform. Traditionally, "affordable" has coincided with "entry-level." So now we have an expensive entry-level chip (the i3)? The iMac chip?

Since there are "Extreme Edition" i7's, then i7 doesn't correspond with high-end.

vPro, Clarksfield (mobile) and Lynnfield (desktop) will each have Core i5 and i7 versions. These are differentiated by "featureset and capability."

Intel will also use the star rating system -"More stars indicate greater features and increased capabilities" - which is what i3, i5, and i7 are supposed to denote. http://www.intel.com/consumer/rating.htm

But I don't know which are dual-core or quad core or anything else from a number like i7-975. Clarkdale and Arrandale dual-core will roll out later this year and there will be dual core i7s. Hexacore is coming.

With their track record, I don't have faith that their numbering scheme will be any more rational or informative than the current one: I can't just look at "i7-940", "i7-950" "i7-965", or "i7-975" and know one is a "base" i7 and the other Extreme.

It can't seriously be that hard to come up with a sensible naming scheme for laymen to understand.

Reply Score: 1