Intel To Rebrand Processors In 2008 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."
Re-rebranding? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Re-rebranding? (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry, I guess I took on the geek role of spoiling jokes with accuracies.
Re: (Score:2)
So it looks like they're already mingling.
Re: (Score:2)
Re-rebranding? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Re-rebranding? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's the one for watching German porn, right?
Re: (Score:1)
So, uhm, yeah.
Apple's Core (Score:5, Funny)
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!
iCore (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
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)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
from a trusted source (Score:5, Funny)
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)
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)
-- 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: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I thought it was because they added 100 to 486 and got 585.6777475772 ?
Naming processors (Score:4, Insightful)
Then, for those who want more - socket/clock/cache/whatever.
AMD, don't follow suit! (Score:1, Insightful)
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)
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah that'd be a good name for a processor.
Re: (Score:2)
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: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Still the same old ugly sticker (Score:2, Funny)
So yes, you still get the same old ugly sticker on new desktops.
Re: (Score:2)
Huh? (Score:5, Funny)
I'm getting Smurf flashbacks.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but replacing all the letterhead stationery is going to be expensive.
Chris Mattern
Oh to have simple names (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
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.
:: humble bow :: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Catchy (Score:5, Funny)
Much better....
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Monty Python's "Life of Intel" (Score:2)
I thought the whole point was to confuse the user (Score:2)
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)
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)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
This actually makes sense, needs to be expanded (Score:2, Insightful)
[vV].+ (Score:3, Insightful)
Meaningful names (Score:2)
AMD New Brands to Match? (Score:1, Interesting)
AMD Eddies! Fast Eddies : More cores for less!
AMD Apology : Sorry we pissed you off Intel!
Re: (Score:2)
Check out this neat article I stumbled upon not too long ago while pricing an AMD system for a friend:
http://www.viperlair.com/reviews/cpu_mobo/amd/be2350/index.shtml [viperlair.com]
It's actually a review of one of the processors with the new naming convention... but goes into detail as to how to identify processors.
Hang on a second. (Score:3, Informative)
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)
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)
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: (Score:2)
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: (Score:2)
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)
Re: (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:1)
At least, when it was competing against 486 processors shoehorned into the plodding 8 MHz ISA bus. Times rapidly changed, however.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
How about this... (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Re: (Score:1)
Simple ... (Score:2)
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
Re: (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:2)
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)
CPUs and names... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Translation: (Score:5, Insightful)
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)
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
And we'll all have to read posts like yours, which make things more confusing...
someone earned their pay (Score:1)
"Intel Centrino with vPro Technology." Just rolls off the tounge doesn't it?
Was already picked up... (Score:2)
Yeah... (Score:2)
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 (Score:2)
Who cares? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
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
Re: (Score:1)
AMD did better, for a moment... (Score:2)
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 "
Opportunity for Intel (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Overlooking The Big Issue (Score:2, Interesting)
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
vConfusing (Score:1)
Idea: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I wish I knew what has been running through the heads of the top engineers at Intel. They have all that research from Alpha. They know how to design a REAL CPU. That the Itanium couldn't emulate x86 to save its life [literally] really says something.
The map just got blurred (Score:2)
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
Which one is faster? (Score:2)
First, I'd have to find something I can't do on my
Re: (Score:1)
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.
Should really come as no surprise (Score:1)