×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel To Rebrand Processors In 2008

kdawson posted more than 6 years ago | from the clearing-the-cluttered-landscape dept.

Intel 125

DJ notes that TechARP has up a look at Intel's plans to rebrand their processors, including what must be a leaked internal chart of the old and new landscape of product names. This story doesn't seem to have been picked up anywhere else yet. Quoting: "We just heard from an anonymous source that Intel will be rebranding their processors in 2008... These new brand names will come into effect on the first day of 2008. Intel hopes that these new brands will not only leverage the strong Core 2 brand but also make it less confusing for the consumer. At the moment, the Intel Centrino mobile platform has five different logos with brands like Centrino, Centrino Duo and Centrino Pro. Starting from January 1, 2008, Intel will consolidate the Centrino Duo and Centrino brands under the Intel Centrino brand, and rename the Centrino Pro as Intel Centrino with vPro Technology."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

125 comments

Re-rebranding? (4, Insightful)

BarlowBrad (940854) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795877)

Didn't Intel just rebrand dropping "Pentium" and going with "Core"?

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795963)

I think they should bite the bullet and go with "Sextium".

Re:Re-rebranding? (3, Interesting)

Jugalator (259273) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795995)

Hexium... :p

Sorry, I guess I took on the geek role of spoiling jokes with accuracies. ;)

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796149)

That depends on whether you use Greek or Latin prefixes. Penta- is Greek, as is Hexa- but Duo is Latin, as is Sexa-

So it looks like they're already mingling.

Re-rebranding? (5, Funny)

Wowsers (1151731) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796173)

Core re-branding such as "Hard-core" (for gamers), "Soft-core" (web browsing) and "Core-blimey" (for every other application)?

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

Jace of Fuse! (72042) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798227)

Wouldn't "Hard-Core" be better off for Web-Browsing considering the content of most people's browsing habits...

So, uhm, yeah.

Apple's Core (5, Funny)

iknownuttin (1099999) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796191)

Didn't Intel just rebrand dropping "Pentium" and going with "Core"?

I think that they're having legal problems with Apple on that one. Apple wants to trademark "Apple Core" for their OS kernel and since they do business with Intel now, they're in some negotiations.

That was pretty good! I pulled a business and legal argument out of my ass that sounds plausible! Get it - "Apple Core"! Funk in A, I need to market myself for some of those seven figure Fortune 500 consulting jobs! The above is the kind of horseshit that gets you in the door!

Re:Apple's Core (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20799305)

Yeah, the Beatles' Apple Corp did that a while ago. You lose.

Re:Apple's Core (1)

manastungare (596862) | more than 6 years ago | (#20800491)

You kid, but lots of the underlying technology in Mac OS X is really named that: Core Image, Core Audio, Core Animation (Leopard only), etc.

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797257)

They did - except they've now reintroduced the Pentium brand in the form of the Pentium Dual Core [wikipedia.org] , which appear to be a lower end CPU, below the Core Duo 2s, but above the Celeron.

I've just been looking into it all as I need to get a new desktop motherboard/CPU, and blimey it's a lot more complicated than when we just had Pentium 1-4, and Celeron for low end. The Core Duo 2 brand itself covers at least two ranges (E4xxx and E6xxx CPUs - Pentium Dual Cores are E2xxx), not to mention things like the Extreme version.

I wonder how much influence branding has on purchasing. I mean, the sad thing is I can't really be bothered seeing if I could get a better deal with Athlon processors, as I can't be arsed deciphering their branding scheme, and working out how they match up to Intel speeds. It was so much easier when it was just AthlonXP xxxx, where the number roughly gave you an equivalent Pentium 4 clock speed...

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

newnerdyuser (191770) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799975)

Your comment confirms my understanding that the Celeron was the low end CPU. Yet, my Celeron M440 1.8Ghz kicks my Pentium 4 3.2Ghz HT CPU all over the room computing PI. Both in laptops.

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 6 years ago | (#20800643)

I would be careful if you need to do something more memory intensive. That is where the Celerons fail.

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

mdwh2 (535323) | more than 6 years ago | (#20800763)

That's because it's much newer - a Celeron M440 is based on Intel Core architecture, whilst a P4 is ancient. Today's low end will usually beat yesterday's high end.

Re:Re-rebranding? (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799827)

Didn't Intel just rebrand dropping "Pentium" and going with "Core"?

They won't drop the "Core" brand, just reorganize their aux names in a better fashion, hopefully introducing better Core suffixes in the process, since the current ones don't mean jack.

Once upon a time I would go to a shop to pick an Intel CPU and I cared about only three things: major model (P I/II/III/IV), cache, and frequency.

Now because of frequent architecture changes, differing number of cores, MHz means nothing, cache is misleading (how it's spread between the cores) and architecture.. I've no clue at all which architecture means what.

If I were them I'd adopt a simple scheme:

Core [major model: I/II/III/IV/V/VI..] [number of cores: 1c, 2c, 4c..] [frequency: 1f (~1ghz), 2f (~1.33GHz), 3f (~1.66 GHz) ... 9f (~3.66GHz) ..] [amount of cache: 1l (512kb), 2l (1mb), 3l (2mb), 4l (4mb)...]

This is just oversimplified, and while it doesn't give perfect picture of the tech specs, it gives a good overall picture of what is the CPU about. Examples:

Core III 4c 3f 5l (aka Core III 435) -> Third generation Core, 4 cores, ~1.66 GHz, 8mb cache
Core III 4c 2f 4l (aka Core III 424) -> Third generation Core, 4 cores, ~1.33 GHz, 4mb cache
Core II 2c 7f 4l (aka Core II 274) -> Second generation Core, ~3 GHz, 2 cores

They can have little modifiers for intermediate frequencies such as "+" or "Extreme" but still, it gives you a good overall picture what's the CPU about).

Come on Intel, it's not that complex, now, is it?

sounds familiar (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20795879)

A few years ago, while browsing around the library downtown, I
had to take a piss. As I entered the john a big beautiful all-American
football hero type, about twenty-five, came out of one of the booths.
I stood at the urinal looking at him out of the corner of my eye as he
washed his hands. He didn't once look at me. He was "straight" and
married - and in any case I was sure I wouldn't have a chance with
him.

As soon as he left I darted into the booth he'd vacated,
hoping there might be a lingering smell of shit and even a seat still
warm from his sturdy young ass. I found not only the smell but the
shit itself. He'd forgotten to flush. And what a treasure he had left
behind. Three or four beautiful specimens floated in the bowl. It
apparently had been a fairly dry, constipated shit, for all were fat,
stiff, and ruggedly textured. The real prize was a great feast of turd
- a nine inch gastrointestinal triumph as thick as a man's wrist.

I knelt before the bowl, inhaling the rich brown fragrance and
wondered if I should obey the impulse building up inside me. I'd
always been a heavy rimmer and had lapped up more than one little
clump of shit, but that had been just an inevitable part of eating ass
and not an end in itself. Of course I'd had jerk-off fantasies of
devouring great loads of it (what rimmer hasn't), but I had never done
it. Now, here I was, confronted with the most beautiful five-pound
turd I'd ever feasted my eyes on, a sausage fit to star in any fantasy
and one I knew to have been hatched from the asshole of the world's
handsomest young stud.

Why not? I plucked it from the bowl, holding it with both
hands to keep it from breaking. I lifted it to my nose. It smelled
like rich, ripe limburger (horrid, but thrilling), yet had the
consistency of cheddar. What is cheese anyway but milk turning to shit
without the benefit of a digestive tract?

I gave it a lick and found that it tasted better then it
smelled. I've found since then that shit nearly almost does.

I hesitated no longer. I shoved the fucking thing as far into
my mouth as I could get it and sucked on it like a big brown cock,
beating my meat like a madman. I wanted to completely engulf it and
bit off a large chunk, flooding my mouth with the intense, bittersweet
flavor. To my delight I found that while the water in the bowl had
chilled the outside of the turd, it was still warm inside. As I chewed
I discovered that it was filled with hard little bits of something I
soon identified as peanuts. He hadn't chewed them carefully and they'd
passed through his body virtually unchanged. I ate it greedily,
sending lump after peanutty lump sliding scratchily down my throat. My
only regret was the donor of this feast wasn't there to wash it down
with his piss.

I soon reached a terrific climax. I caught my cum in the
cupped palm of my hand and drank it down. Believe me, there is no more
delightful combination of flavors than the hot sweetness of cum with
the rich bitterness of shit.

Afterwards I was sorry that I hadn't made it last longer. But
then I realized that I still had a lot of fun in store for me. There
was still a clutch of virile turds left in the bowl. I tenderly fished
them out, rolled them into my handkerchief, and stashed them in my
briefcase. In the week to come I found all kinds of ways to eat the
shit without bolting it right down. Once eaten it's gone forever
unless you want to filch it third hand out of your own asshole. Not an
unreasonable recourse in moments of desperation or simple boredom.

I stored the turds in the refrigerator when I was not using
them but within a week they were all gone. The last one I held in my
mouth without chewing, letting it slowly dissolve. I had liquid shit
trickling down my throat for nearly four hours. I must have had six
orgasms in the process.

I often think of that lovely young guy dropping solid gold out
of his sweet, pink asshole every day, never knowing what joy it could,
and at least once did, bring to a grateful shiteater.

Re:sounds familiar (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796095)

It is shit, Austin.

from a trusted source (5, Funny)

Speare (84249) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795897)

I just heard that the new names range from Confusium to Confusium Core 2 Gold Pro Deluxe 1800 Gamma.

Seriously, though, when has Intel ever simplified the brands to make things easier?

Exactly (3, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796275)

God. What stupid and uninformative names.

They convey neither a perception and ready identification of the product's capability - nor do they associate with anything meaningful - allowing for that association to transfer value to the named object.

Just call them like motorcars and aeroplanes - when these were sensible.

"The Intel Mark VIII C" "The Intel Mark V plus"

They could at least be compared reasonably in relation to each other.

Re:Exactly (-1, Troll)

nilbud (1155087) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796495)

Jherick Carnelian, I'm surprised you are concerned with names.

Re:Exactly (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797283)

"Words matter, for words are the tools of thought, and you will often find that you are thinking badly because you are using the wrong tools, trying to bore a hole with a screw-driver, or draw a cork with a coal-hammer."
-- A.P. Herbert, 1935 :-)

I like a Phantom V [darkforce.com] - I can tell it from a Phantom VI [darkforce.com] , or a Jag Mark 10 Saloon. [big-jags.de]

Re:from a trusted source (1)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796697)

It was easier to keep track of what was what back before they dropped the pure numbering scheme.

Re:from a trusted source (1)

Superpants (930409) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796751)

That sounds about right. I've been slightly confused with the Intel lineup since the Pentium Pro

Re:from a trusted source (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20797673)

"rename the Centrino Pro as Intel Centrino with vPro Technology."

"confusionism"

You have to admit, "Intel Centrino with vPro Technology" kind of rolls off your tongue! ;-)

I'm getting an "Intel Centrino with vPro Technology 8 core 4.2 GHz computer." Beats saying something as complex as, "Q3."

Re:from a trusted source (2, Insightful)

netmansam (1164217) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798131)

>> when has Intel ever simplified the brands to make things easier?

Um, unless you're less than 15 years old, you should remember clearly...

There was that somewhat notable time after their fourth generation (fifth model) of processors with names the simplest of which was like 80486-66 or 80486-SX15 or 80486DX-50, to their fifth generation of processors, called simply:

Pentium

(so named supposedly because they couldn't trademark 80586)

That seems both simpler, a more recognizable model line, AND easier?

Subsequent lines also made sense (for a while):

Pentium MMX
Pentium Pro
Pentium II
Pentium III
Pentium 4

Then, it got confusing, sure, but for nearly a decade they had a good thing going with easy to understand simplification (my own opinion, for sure)

Naming processors (3, Insightful)

Baron_Yam (643147) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795905)

Would it be too hard to name them: Intel [marketing name] [standard benchmark rating]?

Then, for those who want more - socket/clock/cache/whatever.

AMD, don't follow suit! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796425)

It seems that Intel has excess manpower in marketting and they're just giving them makework to keep them busy. Everything beyond Core 2 Duo for desktop and Xeon for servers simply spreads confusion. More just isn't needed.

AMD, just stick to Athlon 64 and Opteron, plus a number which increases as the chip gets faster, and you'll do a lot better.

One extra name for mobile use is OK too, but Intel's use of composite words is just moronic. Not even died in the wool techies have any idea what all the ViiV and vPro crap is.

Re:AMD, don't follow suit! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20798093)

"Not even died in the wool techies have any idea what all the ViiV and vPro crap is." Yes we do. They're both terms for marketing bullcrap.

Re:AMD, don't follow suit! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20798109)

yeah...cause core duo totally described the fact that it was a single core processor....

Re:Naming processors (1)

mux2000 (832684) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797301)

You mean like Intel(R) Core(TM)2 6400@2.13GHz 4 6.15.6 0000-06F6-0000-0000-0000-0000 1600MHz/3066MHz 64 bit 266MHz fpu fpu_exception wp 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 nx x86-64 constant_tsc pni monitor ds_cpl vmx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr lahf_lm cpufreq L1 cache 32KB L2 cache 2MB



Yeah that'd be a good name for a processor.

Re:Naming processors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20798335)

GPP didn't actually say anything about putting extension sets, CPUID or specific version number in the title. Intel(R) Core(TM)2 6400@2.3GHZ 1600MHz/3066MHz 64 bit 266Mhz 32KB/2MB would be a perfectly acceptable name, with everything after the @ included on the back of the package.

Re:Naming processors (1)

pushing-robot (1037830) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797531)

Would it be too hard to name them: Intel [marketing name] [standard benchmark rating]?

Brilliant! We should create a standard benchmark for everything! Imagine if cars were named "Honda Ridgeline 1267" and "Toyota Corolla 1605" - you'd know which one was right for you just by comparing the rating!

Re:Naming processors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20797877)

This is the new Intel Kickass 500k bogomips?

Re:Naming processors (1)

KuRa_Scvls (932317) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799869)

What, like what AMD did?

Why would intel do something well established, examplified and proven to be working.

Still the same old ugly sticker (2, Funny)

nathan.fulton (1160807) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795921)

TFA: "In the server and workstation segment, Intel will continue to retain the Xeon and Itanium brand names, but with new logos. The Itanium 2 logo, in particular, will only say Itanium Inside. The desktop Core 2 brands and logos will see no changes in 2008."

So yes, you still get the same old ugly sticker on new desktops.

Re:Still the same old ugly sticker (1)

ScrappyLaptop (733753) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798997)

Let me get this straight: "The Itanium 2 logo, in particular, will only say Itanium Inside"

...Isn't that sort of like a Pentium4 logo just saying, "Pentium Inside"? I mean, the Itanium was the first generation IA-64 cpu...and, architecture arguments aside, by the time it was released it wasn't even competitive. So why the retro label?

Huh? (4, Funny)

Gorimek (61128) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795927)

So they're renaming Centrino to Centrino? That's awesome!

I'm getting Smurf flashbacks.

Re:Huh? (1)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797205)

So they're renaming Centrino to Centrino? That's awesome!


Yeah, but replacing all the letterhead stationery is going to be expensive.

Chris Mattern

Re:Huh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20798167)

I'm getting Smurf flashbacks.


That's why you should make sure you get them from a reputable dealer before you smoke 'em.

Oh to have simple names (4, Funny)

haaz (3346) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795975)

I can never remember if my MacBook has a dual core Core Duo 2 or if it's a duo core Core 2 Dou Dual II or a Coral Dualo Duex 2. :-\

Re:Oh to have simple names (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796221)

Try going to Wikipedia and asking them if it has Santa Rosa. ;-)

Re:Oh to have simple names (1)

sanman2 (928866) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797853)

They'll rename it by juggling some letters. It'll be called the Door Too Coolo

Re:Oh to have simple names (2, Funny)

forkazoo (138186) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797315)

I can never remember if my MacBook has a dual core Core Duo 2 or if it's a duo core Core 2 Dou Dual II or a Coral Dualo Duex 2. :-\


Bah, why remember. Whenever you want to check, just pull it out and have a look. That way you can be sure what you have: A Duo Ex Machina.

Catchy (4, Funny)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | more than 6 years ago | (#20795981)

rename the Centrino Pro as Intel Centrino with vPro Technology

Much better....

Re:Catchy (1)

aszego (668997) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796309)

I would guess that the new name would most likely indicate the addition of the VPro feature, already available in Intel Desktop boards to the Centrino brand.......?

I thought the whole point was to confuse the user (1)

Joce640k (829181) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796013)

I thought the whole point was to confuse the user since they finally gave up on the "GHz" rating system.

I mean, how fast is a "Pentium 5473" or whatever it is they call them these days?

Re:I thought the whole point was to confuse the us (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20799169)

Faster than a Pentium 5373. Which bit of this is hard? The chips are the the Core 2. The Core 2 exists both in Duo (2 core) and Quad (4 core) configuration. Then there is the numerical designation. Bigger numbers are better - the 2xxx series are the slower (but highly overclockable) chips, the 4xxx Series are the laptop-like cut down slightly chips, and the 6xxx series are the fastest and most expensive.

So, to recap: Bigger numbers are better.

And if you want to compare them to AMD? Go read a benchmark relevant to the task you wish to perform, the numbers haven't been comparable since the 486 anyway.

Worst adverts ever! (5, Funny)

smallfries (601545) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796015)

For the love of god slashdot, for once be brave and do NOT under any circumstances RTFA. It never stops loading! There are cycling video ads in strips own the side and it uses that horrific ad-word shit. It was like a view into hell itself...

Re:Worst adverts ever! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796097)

I did not notice (something to do with adblock pro I guess :-)

Re:Worst adverts ever! (1)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796863)

You so need adblock and noscript. To me, it looks like any other web page - no flashing, no movement, no ads, no weirdo-underlined words. There is a little extra white-space near the top, probably for a banner-ad that didn't collapse completely.

I can even click the thumbnail of the chart to get the full-size image without any problem - which is usually what fails, if anything is going to fail, when running with noscript.

Septimo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796037)

Sounds like an antacid.

This actually makes sense, needs to be expanded (2, Insightful)

Eponymous Crowbar (974055) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796049)

I have been a hands-on techie since the days of the 386. That means I am overdue for a severe case of Alzheimer's and a possible touch of Delusional Managementitis. After those two factors, Intel's stupid naming schemes are confusing enough that I don't bother trying to remember the differences between their processor families. It's definitely easier to buy AMD. But I know I would spend the extra time to work out the differences if I wanted to build a new box. That can't be what Intel's marketing people are hoping for -- "Buy Intel, if you really want to" just isn't a very appealing line.

[vV].+ (2, Insightful)

paul248 (536459) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796069)

Well, it's not like anybody ever knew what vPro and VIIV were for in the first place.

Meaningful names (1)

Telvin_3d (855514) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796079)

A general re-branding for the core families of the chip is fine, but it would be better if they re-vamped the model numbers. How it should work (in my own, special, little world) is a general brand name that lets you know what type of ship you are dealing with in general. Then a 6-8 digit model number. It should be easy enough to figure out a naming convention that would give the number of cores, clock speed, and cache. When I am trying to figure out which chip I want to by from them, it would be great if I didn't have to research each (meaningless) model number individually.

AMD New Brands to Match? (1, Interesting)

tjstork (137384) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796105)

AMD Roadkill!
AMD Eddies! Fast Eddies : More cores for less!
AMD Apology : Sorry we pissed you off Intel!

How 'bout (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796151)


Sandpiper! More steppings less work!

Hang on a second. (2, Informative)

His name cannot be s (16831) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796155)

... this did *not* clear anything up.

Actually... I'm more confused. Shit.

I thought that centrino, viiv and vpro were all just marketdroid-speak for "ooooh! Now with Ridges!" and "Not Just White! Really Bright!"

I'm going to assume that nothing happened. we'll see how I fare then.

Slashdot: rumor central (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796203)

This story doesn't seem to have been picked up anywhere else yet.

And you know, isn't that a good reason to not be pushing this as fact JUST yet? Rather than just trying to be digg and first past the gate on every stupid false rumor that comes out, you either (a) wait for confirmation or (b) (horrors for a slashdot submitter) GET confirmation? Just a thought.

I'm not saying the story is false, because I don't know. I just figure that if this, like the latest i{Tablet, Newton, Pincushion}, this might be shown to be false and Slashdot loses even more credibility with serious viewers

Get back to model numbers... (3, Insightful)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796235)

I know why they stopped doing it, but I wish these CPU * Video card companies would use actual model numbers ala 386SX/386DX, 486DX/486Dlc etc...

I also know that lead to ridiculous over use that we currently see in video cards 9800XX-Max-Super-X.

It might actually bring back some truth to the consumer.
686-Mobile/2.2GHz vs 686/3GHz vs 4c868/1.8Ghz

Re:Get back to model numbers... (1)

the_skywise (189793) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796289)

Oh no it won't... Look what AMD did...

Our model #s will now reflect our new analysis methodology which we feel better reflects the speed of our processors. Thusly, the AMD 25000K is equal to (using our illudium pu 32 ESK rating) a P5-686/22/44SX processor. Whereas the AMD 37000Q is equal to a P5-686/22/33DX processor.

There... see this eliminates all customer confusion as well as puts our processors in a more comparable light!

Re:Get back to model numbers... (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798645)

It might actually bring back some truth to the consumer.
686-Mobile/2.2GHz vs 686/3GHz vs 4c868/1.8Ghz

No, what it'll do is bring-back the MHz myth, in full-force.

Gee, Intel has this 4Ghz CPU, and AMD has this 3GHz CPU for a bit less, and VIA has this 2.5GHz CPU for half the price...

Buy VIA CPU... Go home and spend the next two years wondering why the hell your computer is ridiculously slow, and pondering the meaning of MHz myth.

IMHO, AMD is the only one making even the slightest attempt at an honest rating. Intel doesn't WANT their customers to be be able to tell how fast one CPU is versus another. VIA wants to keep the MHz myth going as long as they can (as do ARM/MIPS/etc. suppliers).

Re:Get back to model numbers... (1)

johnw (3725) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799593)

VIA wants to keep the MHz myth going as long as they can (as do ARM/MIPS/etc. suppliers).
Hardly a justified accusation against ARM - ARM processors have always produced much *higher* bang per MHz than their competitors, right back to when it was launched and an 8 MHz ARM could absolutely cream a 33MHz Intel processor.

Re:Get back to model numbers... (1)

TheVelvetFlamebait (986083) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799391)

I also know that lead to ridiculous over use that we currently see in video cards 9800XX-Max-Super-X.
I bought an ALDI computer that contained an 9***XXL (I forget the specific). Funnily enough, the card wasn't especially big, let alone extra, extra large.

Re:Get back to model numbers... (1)

owndao (1025990) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799863)

I seem to recall something about not being able to trademark a number? Yes, I preferred the numerical part name that at least indicated the generation of the processor.

How about this... (1)

HexaByte (817350) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796273)

One core 2 core 3 core 4, we're always gonna want a little Moore!

Give us names that tells what's what, or we'll switch to AMD and they'll kick your butt!

Stop marketing and give is a way to know cores/speed/cache/socket/architecture.

Simple ... (1)

tomstdenis (446163) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796277)

Two steps...

1. Use model #s for the cpus... e.g. 6600AT or someshit

2. Put a ref chart with relevant deets on a website [*]

3. Profit.

I lied there are three steps.

[*] deets like clock rate, fsb speed, TDP, cache per core, shared cache, cache latency/ways/ports, instruction set features [e.g. SSE, MMX, etc], pin-count, voltage, heat tolerance

Instead of calling it the "Centrino Duo Laptop" you can say "it's the Centrino 6600JZX" then a smart user can just look up 6600JZX on their website and know what the fuck it is. Do the same for the northbridge and GPU, et voila.

The confusion comes not from clever names, but when they try to consolidate all the info down.

Or in the case of Nvidia/Ati where they use non-well-ordered numbers. Like is the 8800GTS better than the fastest 7xxx series? Hint: There are stripped down versions of the 8xxx series that are worse than cards in the 7xxx series. Nvidia doesn't really provide a lot of info [or they didn't last I checked] concerning clock rates/bus width and freq/number of pixel pipes, etc...

Of course if they just ordered the fucking numbers that would work well. There probably is method to their madness, but I don't know what it is and most customers probably don't either. They could do [probably are what do I know] use the first digit for the major revision, e.g. 8xyz, but then use x/y/z for levels of mem/bus/GPU performance, e.g. a 8000 would be basic, 8009 would have the best GPU in that class, 8900 the most memory, 8090 the fastest/widest bus, etc.

That way if you saw 8555 and 7999 you could easily tell that the latter is the maxed out version of the previous revision of the core [and likely faster].

Tom

vPro! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20796299)

vPro just kicked in, yo!

This is slashdot (0, Offtopic)

Tragek (772040) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796319)

We care why? They're consolidating their badges, and increasing the type size on some. Whoopity fuck.

CPUs and names... (1)

TBerben (1061176) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796321)

When I started gathering components for the first PC I built I remember very well the biggest obstacle: processor names... It was just so darn confusing that I drew a bloody chart to keep track of all of the different names used by Intel and AMD... I really hope this is going to change now, I literally spent hours on finding out which name belonged to which CPU and I don't plan on wasting that time again on my next PC...

Translation: (5, Insightful)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796583)

A new manager has just arrived. He found the old product name confusing.

Unfortunately, they're confusing for a good reason: the product line is complex.

So, he'll impose a new set of names on it. He will think the new names are less confusing, because they make sense to him. And he says it will make things less confusing for customers, because he projects his own feeling onto his customers. And perhaps the new names really are a little less confusing.

But in reality it will make things more confusing, because of the name change.

The people who actually did understand the old names will be confused by the new ones, and the people who learn the new ones will be confused whenever they have to deal with legacy memos or documentation that uses the old ones, and everyone who is deeply involved in the products will have to carry around with a little wallet-sized conversion table around them with both sets of names on them.

Meanwhile, the average customer won't be aware of anything other than the processor brand (Intel) and the clock rate.

Intel's marketing drones are crazy (4, Interesting)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798169)

In the 1990s I worked for a packaging design firm that had Intel as a client. The company's assignment was to design packaging and in-store displays for the latest Intel processor, the Pentium II, now with MMX. So Intel shipped us all the latest logos associated with the chip.

I don't know if you remember that logo, but it looked pretty much like this. [channeladvisor.com] Blue Intel logo, purple and black Pentium II logo down below, and an ugly little purple-red-yellow rainbow gradient thing in the corner that said "MMX."

So the designers did their designs, they conferred with Intel, final designs were agreed upon, and the designers delivered their comps to Intel. Somebody gets a call:

Intel: We're looking at the final designs and everything seems in order. Except the logo seems all messed up.

(Our designers didn't do anything to the logo, so far as we knew, so this was a little surprising.) Us: What's wrong?

Intel: Well, this doesn't really look like Pentium Purple, and this logo definitely is not Intel Blue.

Us: Ah. Well... yes, I see what you mean. Not to worry. This is pretty normal when dealing with four-color process. We'll have one of our production people on-site at the printer's to make sure it matches your sample as closely as possible.

Intel: As closely as possible doesn't cut it. I need this to be Intel Blue and this absolutely must be Pentium Purple. And now that you mention it, the rainbow gradient doesn't really look like it goes from Intel Red to Intel Purple to Intel Yellow, either. Did you get our Pantone swatches?

Us: Well, yes. But since this is a four-color job, you realize that you can't really get all those colors into the job. They don't all fit into the four-color gamut. We assumed that you wanted the closest approximation for each (and I think they match pretty well, but we can do better).

Intel: Not acceptable. We NEED this to be Intel Blue. This MUST be Pentium Purple.

Us: The only way to do that is to use custom spot colors. We'd have to run an additional pass through the printer for each color.

Intel: Then that's what you have to do.

Us: OK, so just to confirm. For every single piece of advertising we produce for you -- every box, every poster, every five-foot-high cardboard cutout, every display -- in addition to the four-color process for all the photographs and box art, you want us to run four additional spot colors. And you're willing to incur the additional charges that this entails. And this is just to print the Intel Pentium II logo, which on this box I have here is exactly 1.2cm tall on the lower righthand corner of the box.

Intel: That is correct. Spare no expense.

The lesson learned: Don't expect rational decisionmaking from the internal marketing department of a behemoth corporation.

Re:Intel's marketing drones are crazy (2, Insightful)

gEvil (beta) (945888) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798233)

And naturally you scrapped any materials that had any registration problems, right? : p

Re:Translation: (1)

evilviper (135110) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798599)

He will think the new names are less confusing, because they make sense to him. And he says it will make things less confusing for customers, because he projects his own feeling onto his customers. And perhaps the new names really are a little less confusing. But in reality it will make things more confusing, because of the name change.

And we'll all have to read posts like yours, which make things more confusing...

someone earned their pay (1)

coaxial (28297) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796845)

From the blurb:

rename the Centrino Pro as Intel Centrino with vPro Technology.


"Intel Centrino with vPro Technology." Just rolls off the tounge doesn't it?

Yeah... (1)

Xichekolas (908635) | more than 6 years ago | (#20796959)

Since that makes it soooooo much more obvious Intel... good one.

Seriously, have no idea the difference between Centrino and Centrino with vPro whatever. Why do you actually give one a completely different name?

Minor but interesting (1)

GarfBond (565331) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797087)

Probably an admission that viiv and vpro haven't been anywhere near the success that Centrino was.

Who cares? (1)

gelfling (6534) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797153)

Make it cheaper and stop being assholes with the ever changing slot design. And hey here's an idea, make a chip that runs somewhere south of the temperature of the sun.

Re:Who cares? (1)

go_jesse (243193) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797639)

Make it cheaper and stop being assholes with the ever changing slot design. And hey here's an idea, make a chip that runs somewhere south of the temperature of the sun.


dude, when was the last time you built a computer? At idle I can't even get my Core2 to turn on the fan on the CPU heatsink, and as I recall, LGA775 has been around now for a couple of years. Ass-u-me-ing that I misconstrued what you meant by "slot" and you actually mean the plug in card slots, I gotta say "huh?" PCI and PCI Express seem to be pretty ubiquitous these days. I don't even know why I'm responding, I think I've finally cracked.

AMD did better, for a moment... (1)

SanityInAnarchy (655584) | more than 6 years ago | (#20797733)

From what I remember, there was at one point a "Mobile Athlon" that was like a desktop athlon, but designed for better power efficiency, etc.

What really isn't clear here is, they've taken the Core 2 Duo out of a desktop, made a version for laptops, but they now just call it Centrino, or maybe Centrino Duo. Which is confusing as hell -- when my new job gave me a laptop, it had a "Centrino Duo", and I had to go online to check if it could run a 64-bit OS -- because the main difference between "Core Duo" and "Core2 Duo", I thought, was that Core Duo was dual-core, and Core2 Duo was dual-core 64-bit.

This is even less obvious. My next Intel laptop, if I get an Intel laptop, might have a straight "Centrino", and I'll have to take some obscure model number online, or just boot Linux on it, to find out if it has dual-core, 64-bit, or even what the clock speed is.

Stupid marketing like this won't stop me from buying whichever is the better deal, but if it's close, I might just buy that clearly-labeled AMD Turion64 X2.

Opportunity for Intel (2, Insightful)

pickapeppa (731249) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798253)

As resident IT guy for kith and kin, I get asked about this all the time. And frankly, unless I happened to have payed attention recently, I can't really give a straight answer. I have a job, a girlfriend, a cat, and other stuff to do. Intel had it easy with the Pentiums, higher numbers (Roman numerals and price) were better. Now, as has been correctly pointed out here, it's more complex. They really need to return to the simpler format for regular PC buyers. Something like MyIntel 1,2,3,etc... to market chips for the folks and ProIntel for the widget fiddlers among us who Need to Know.

Overlooking The Big Issue (2, Interesting)

NeoBlazeSJX (943994) | more than 6 years ago | (#20798505)

I don't think there is any way to make processor naming and branding less confusing to the average consumer because the average consumer mostly doesn't care. The terms mobile, dual core, hyperthreaded etc, etc mean nothing. All they want to know is if it's "fast (enough)".

Meanwhile rebranding does litlle for tech heads like us because what you call a processor isn't as important as what it does. We already know what we're looking for in a processor. We understand what kind of processor suits our needs and look at the acual numbers: clock frequency, number of cores, data bus, cache, as well as the actual performance benchmarks--all things that mean NOTHING to a general consumer.

So really there isn't much processor companies can do to make their product lines easier to understand. The general consumers don't care, and tech people already know all they're looking for. So rather than market to the consumer, just throw up the processor and the specs to the guys who really choose the chips--the hobbyists and guys in IT and engineering who actually build/choose the computers. It doesn't matter what you call it, we'll figure out what to use any way.

vConfusing (1)

JackMeyhoff (1070484) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799605)

Are they trying to sell the SAME hardware to the same consumers by rebranding it and fooling them into thinking it is new?

A rose or whatever... (1)

dotancohen (1015143) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799729)

Of course, a Pentium by any other name will still smell as sweet... overclocked and baking at 70 degrees Celsius...

Idea: (1)

Verte (1053342) | more than 6 years ago | (#20799747)

New naming convention: 21x64 / EV-y. I bet that would turn heads.

Re:Idea: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20800205)

Thou shalt not call the names of the deads in vain. Remember the time when the AXP was emulating the PPro faster than the actual top of the line PPro could go.

The map just got blurred (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | more than 6 years ago | (#20800819)

even more. All those naming schemes are there for one reason only: To confuse the customers. The amount of time it takes to differentiate between all models just makes things horrible. The older schemes with numbers or names with generation numbers was easier...

But on the other hand - if you sell the same chip with different brandings it's easier to make much more money since it is easier to motivate the higher prices. So probably the processor industry has gone the same way as the car industry and created a multitude of models from the same base with very small differences.

Which one is faster? (1)

Frantactical Fruke (226841) | more than 6 years ago | (#20800825)

I buy computers with a three year lag, so this summer, I had no problems knowing that this Pentium IV thingy is faster than my previous Pentium III doodad. I have a vague recollection that Celeron means an el-cheapo PIV with less cache, but I'm going to have to bone up on these Centrino, Core, Duo thingamajigs etc. three years from now when I buy my next used computer. Or I'll just shrug and figure that any of those is bound to be faster than this old heap.

First, I'd have to find something I can't do on my present machine, though. Unlike some systems, GNU/Linux isn't getting much slower over the years, if you ignore the huge windowing environments. Go EvilWM!

    PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
  3739 fruke 15 0 2856 1100 928 S 0.0 0.2 0:00.19 evilwm

And yeah, I know I'm just killing the computer industry. I do office work, process audio, surf the net and watch videos. Why would I need a supercomputer on my desk?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...