Intel Tries New Nomenclature - Again

Just at the time when Average Joe has the naming schema of Intel processors licked, Intel decides that new processors need radically different names, or that current processor levels aren’t differentiated well enough.

Those who have been around, and interested, long enough remember the first time names came around, with the Pentium, instead of simply 586. Then there was Pentium Pro, then a number added for a while, Pentium II, Pentium III, Pentium IV, and then another set of changes. We also remember Celeron, especially those who overclocked them, or made fun of them, calling them de-Celerons.

The last set of changes, with three digit numbers having nothing to do with frequency or architecture, and only relating to capabilities after the user has done a bit of studying, was perhaps the most confusing for all.

Then, a few seasons ago, we got away from Pentium-something altogether, and got Core, then Core 2, and so on.

Well, time again for a change in the halls of Santa Clara -

from Tech Connect

Shedding some light on what we’ll soon hear coming out of Intel’s mouth, Bill Calder has posted on the Technology@Intel a piece about the company’s branding strategy. Basically, Intel is looking to focus on the ‘Core’ brand, while keeping the Celeron, Pentium and Atom names in use. The Core 2 Duo/Quad names will die out with the LGA775 parts, but the Core i3 and Core i5 will start coming into play in the more or less near future.

Bound to create some confusion, the future naming scheme will see CPUs on different sockets bear the same family name - so the higher-end Lynnfield quad-cores will be named Core i7 ’something’, while those without HT (hyper-threading) and lower clocks will be known as Core i5 ‘insert number here’.

Overall, the plan is to use Core i3 for entry-level, Core i5 for mid-level, and Core i7 for high-end processors, both for the desktop and mobile segments. Things should become a little more complex and yet clear once Intel introduces the Lynnfield and Clarkdale processors as they’ll span the whole Core range. Until then, it’s official - the Core i5 and i3 names are a go!

The problem here is that names will not necessarily reflect architectures. So some confusion is bound to occur. Perhaps we’ll see shopping ads similar to the Microsoft laptop shoppers, but instead with one of the big OEMs guiding some dysfunctional shopper through the choice of the correct processor for their desktop machine. “Uh, Joe, you like to transcode movies, so you need the power of a Core i7, and since Christina only uses her computer to Tweet and keep up her MySpace page, she will get along fine with a Core i3!”

Though some might not think so, I think the AMD designators have always been clear, and made sense, with few problems. The people I interact with seem to think so, too. Athlon, Phenom, and Opteron…yes, those have the ability to tell you what you need quickly.

Even if Sempron seemed a stupid moniker, people got the idea that it was entry level. Will people understand that Core2 is a more powerful, if older design, processor than a Core i3?  I’m not so sure.

§

•