Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Intel Hardware

Intel To Rebrand Processors In 2008 125

Posted by kdawson from the clearing-the-cluttered-landscape dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel To Rebrand Processors In 2008 More

Intel To Rebrand Processors In 2008

Comments Filter:

  • Re-rebranding? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by BarlowBrad ( 940854 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:00PM (#20795877)
    Didn't Intel just rebrand dropping "Pentium" and going with "Core"?
    • I think they should bite the bullet and go with "Sextium".

    • Re-rebranding? (Score:5, Funny)

      by Wowsers ( 1151731 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:40PM (#20796173) Journal
      Core re-branding such as "Hard-core" (for gamers), "Soft-core" (web browsing) and "Core-blimey" (for every other application)?

    • Apple's Core (Score:5, Funny)

      by iknownuttin ( 1099999 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:43PM (#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: (Score:1)

      by mdwh2 ( 535323 )
      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 v
      • 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.
        • I would be careful if you need to do something more memory intensive. That is where the Celerons fail.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by mdwh2 ( 535323 )
          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: (Score:2)

        by Znork ( 31774 )
        "I mean, the sad thing is I can't really be bothered"

        Personally I'm tempted to go solely by the shop rating - that $xx rating thing they have. As I understand it, the lower the numbers after the $ sign are, the better.

        Seriously. Old benchmarking sites and hardware guides have become close to unusable due to overadvertizing, and performance has come so far it's rarely I find CPU capacity an issue. Just buy whatever's in the cheap range and you'll get less screwed than if you buy the expensive stuff (unless y

    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by Mister Kay ( 1119377 )
      What's in a name? Would an Intel by any other name be cheaper than an AMD?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by suv4x4 ( 956391 )
      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 (h
      • Damn. Someone call Blizzard, Intel ripped their naming scheme from the Diablo II item-generator.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by soloha ( 545393 )
      When you get right down to it, all people really want to know is "what is the performance of this chip" and maybe "how much power it consumes". I think Intel and AMD should both just drop all these silly and confusing names and using some kind of standard naming convention using SpecInt and SpecFp, and some notation for power consumption. Say maybe, for example (si06 for specint2006, sfp06 for specfp2006, w for watts) "Intel si06_nn, sfp06_nn @ 25w". Then picking a cpu would just be a matter of a simple com

  • from a trusted source (Score:5, Funny)

    by Speare ( 84249 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:01PM (#20795897) Homepage Journal

    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 (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) * on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:59PM (#20796275) Homepage Journal
      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: (Score:2)

      by nurb432 ( 527695 )
      It was easier to keep track of what was what back before they dropped the pure numbering scheme.
    • That sounds about right. I've been slightly confused with the Intel lineup since the Pentium Pro

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by netmansam ( 1164217 )
      >> 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?

      Sub
      • the simplest of which was like 80486-66 or 80486-SX15 or 80486DX-50

        It was even deceiving back then. The 486DX-50 has a 50 MHz bus. The 486DX2-66 has a clock doubled 33 MHz bus. The 486DX4-100 had a pitiful 25 MHz bus. (or was it a tripled 33 Mhz bus?)

        There were lots of weenies throwing around their 'numbers' back then. And people with their AMD parts, which they called 'DX' but had the weak AMD math co-processor of the time.

      • Not to be overly pedantic, but many of us felt the Pentium 4, at least in it's early incarnations, was a step down from the Pentium III. Intel is still having to overcome that perception in parts of the tech community. When you see one of those P4 stickers on a box, you reflexively hold your nose.

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

        I thought it was because they added 100 to 486 and got 585.6777475772 ?

  • Naming processors (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:02PM (#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! (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      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

      • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        "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: (Score:1)

      by mux2000 ( 832684 )
      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.
    • 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!
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • AMD only did it as a marketing gymic, mainly because their processors had features that made raw cpu clock speed numbers meaningless.

  • 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.
    • 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? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Gorimek ( 61128 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:07PM (#20795927) Homepage
    So they're renaming Centrino to Centrino? That's awesome!

    I'm getting Smurf flashbacks.

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


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

      Chris Mattern

  • Oh to have simple names (Score:5, Funny)

    by haaz ( 3346 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:15PM (#20795975) Homepage
    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. :-\
    • My next processor will be a dual Intel Core 2 Duo Twin Pair Duplex Couple.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by forkazoo ( 138186 )

      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 (Score:5, Funny)

    by clarkkent09 ( 1104833 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:16PM (#20795981)
    rename the Centrino Pro as Intel Centrino with vPro Technology

    Much better....
  • 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 (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      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 relev

  • Worst adverts ever! (Score:5, Funny)

    by smallfries ( 601545 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:19PM (#20796015) Homepage
    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...
    • 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.
  • 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 peopl

  • [vV].+ (Score:3, Insightful)

    by paul248 ( 536459 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:26PM (#20796069) Homepage
    Well, it's not like anybody ever knew what vPro and VIIV were for in the first place.
  • 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
  • AMD Roadkill!
    AMD Eddies! Fast Eddies : More cores for less!
    AMD Apology : Sorry we pissed you off Intel!

  • Hang on a second. (Score:3, Informative)

    by His name cannot be s ( 16831 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:37PM (#20796155) Journal
    ... 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.

  • Not new, not 'anonymous'. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Anonymous Freak ( 16973 ) <anonymousfreak@i ... inus threevowels> on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:50PM (#20796225) Journal
    Anonymous source? Just heard?

    This is not only old news, but it came direct from a quoted, named, Intel representative! C|Net story from July 20th [news.com]

  • Get back to model numbers... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by B5_geek ( 638928 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @05:52PM (#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

    • 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!

    • 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.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by johnw ( 3725 )

        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.

        • 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.

          I have no doubt that was true, many years ago, when it was competing against 486s. At least as long as you didn't try to do any floating point operations...

          It's certainly not true today, with Intel's XScale chips pushing 1GHz without improving performance much over it's predecessors, floating point calculations being much m

          • I have no doubt that was true, many years ago, when it was competing against 486s.

            At least, when it was competing against 486 processors shoehorned into the plodding 8 MHz ISA bus. Times rapidly changed, however.

    • 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: (Score:1)

      by owndao ( 1025990 )
      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.
  • 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.

    • One core 2 core 3 core 4 ... Give us names that tells what's what ...

      If it's anything like the DX nomenclature, 2 means 2 cores, 3 means 2.5 cores and 4 means 3 cores.

      • In the DX nomenclature, 2 means 'half-speed bus', 3 means 'one-third speed bus' and 4 means 'one-quarter-speed bus.' As the numbers grew, the turgidity of the processor when not running in primary cache became obvious.
  • 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 fu

    • 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].

      Bu... but... but that would make sense. I mean, people could actually see which was older or newer, or better suited for their use. How do you expect the manufacturer to be able to both a) crank out new versions with high premium prices, and b) still manage to sell off old stock with a scheme like this?!

      Pfft. How un-capitalistic.

      By the way: my c2d

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

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

      You mean like this page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors [wikipedia.org]

      That page clearly shows the model number, clock frequency, L2 cache size, FSB speed, CPU multiplier, voltage, TDP (thermal rating), socket type, release date, part number and cost of each Intel Core 2 chip. The only valid argument I can think of is that Intel doesn't have a page like that on their own site and

  • This is slashdot (Score:1, Offtopic)

    by Tragek ( 772040 )
    We care why? They're consolidating their badges, and increasing the type size on some. Whoopity fuck.
  • 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...
    • When I started gathering parts for the first PC I built (parts bought at a swap meet) the processor names weren't the biggest obstacle. I had the choice of a 4.77 MHz 8088 main board or a 'turbo' main board at 8 MHz. I think they had started making the rocket fast 10 MHz boards by then, but not for sale at a swapmeet. My first machine had a second hand 'original' IBM PC power supply. The ones that were 63.5 watts. I also achieved all 640K of RAM quickly, by purchasing used (solder pull) 256Kx1 DRAM chi

  • Translation: (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dpbsmith ( 263124 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @06:40PM (#20796583) Homepage
    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 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by PCM2 ( 4486 ) on Saturday September 29, 2007 @10:42PM (#20798169) Homepage
      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.

    • 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...
  • 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?
  • I heard this on the CNET podcast Buzz Out Loud a few weeks ago...

  • 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?

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

      • He means that he's finally had to give up. For years, he kept using his original full-footprint PC-AT motherboard (one of the big boys that used almost all TTL chips) by shoehorning in a little daughterboard with a 386 processor on it. Then he finally was able to locate a 486 daughterboard to plug into the 386 socket. He also probably still uses Intel Inboards to keep the machine well stocked with 16 megs of RAM. The four ISA slot 4MB Inboard cards take up a lot of slots, but with the Video Card (a Para
  • 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 "
  • 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 mar
    • I have a job, a wife, two dogs, eleven cats, and 5 acres of land to keep the weeds from taking over. I just drive up to Frys every once in awhile and buy whatever mainboard combo they're blowing out at $79 that week. It works pretty good, too.
  • 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 l
  • Are they trying to sell the SAME hardware to the same consumers by rebranding it and fooling them into thinking it is new?
  • New naming convention: 21x64 / EV-y. I bet that would turn heads.
  • 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 create

  • 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
    • My vague recollection is that the Celeron was a slot one lower-end version of the Pentium II. Kinda the 386sx for-the-new-generation. But the Celeron 300 was every kid's favorite overclocking processor for a time.

      I remember at one point I sold my old Pentium-75 processor to a guy at work for a pretty decent price because he was so excited to overclock it.
  • As I tell all my customers. Intel is a marketing company FIRST and a processor company SECOND.

Slashdot Top Deals

Beware of Programmers who carry screwdrivers. -- Leonard Brandwein

Close