Core 3/5/7 without the Ultra.
"Core 7 150U"
The RPR HX products use the 14th Gen branding.
Core 3/5/7 without the Ultra.
"Core 7 150U"
The RPR HX products use the 14th Gen branding.
I don't know if it was meant as a literal comparison of SKUs with a typo, or just a hypothetical question, but there is no Core 1005H from Intel that I am aware of. There are similar SKUs but not that exact one. What Intel has made are the following:
Celeron 1005M (Ivy Bridge)
Core i3-1005G1 (Ice Lake)
Core i5-10500H (Comet Lake)
dullard
Elite Member
- May 21, 2001
- 25,994
- 4,608
- 126
Lets go with the assumption of a hypothetical CPU with the new naming. If so, then these are the two chips he is mentioning are:
A) Intel Core ? processor 1005H
B) Intel Core Ultra 7 processor 155H
These names are made up of four parts that I'll color code.
A) Intel Core ? processor 1005H
B) Intel Core Ultra 7 processor 155H
The purple indicates the chip marketing level--Is it premium or mainstream. Unfortunately, the truncated name given to us doesn't indicate the tier (formerly i3, i5, i7, i9), so I left it as a question mark. But, I'll assume that since chip A is so advanced (see the paragraph below) that even a low tier is better than the Ultra 7 of chip B.
The CPU generation is the first two digits in red (although if the first digit is 0 it is not used). Thus:
Chip A is the 10th generation (starting with Meteor Lake being generation 1)
Chip B is the 1st generation (Meteor Lake)
That would make chip A far more advanced for the CPU.
Intel hasn't mentioned what the last two digits in green will be exactly. But I would assume the 05 is low end graphics for the 10th generation and 55 is mid-level graphics for Meteor Lake. I'm going to assume that by the time we get 9 more generations, chip A will still have a more powerful GPU than chip B even though it is a low level for the 10th generation.
Finally, the power level in blue, H, is the same for both chips.
Thus, with the insufficient information given to us, I'll go with chip A as being far superior as it is 9 generations newer.
DrMrLordX
Lifer
- Apr 27, 2000
- 22,902
- 12,971
- 136
Both Intel and AMD have terrible naming schemes for their mobile processors. Intel's scheme has been particularly bad since at least Ice Lake.
- Aug 22, 2001
- 32,012
- 32,465
- 146
Can someone cite a worse example than calling a 2/4 CPU an i7?
Did Intel hire the LoserBenchmark guy to do their marketing?Hilarious!
Link: Intel - Core Truths
Snake Oil... Used car salesman...
This is a new low! (after the rear-view mirror thingy)
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
- Aug 19, 2007
- 4,026
- 6,741
- 136
LOL, Intel seems to have pulled it (the page)!
Last edited:
coercitiv
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2014
- 7,355
- 17,424
- 136
They'll just rebrand it and launch it again in a couple of days
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
- Aug 19, 2007
- 4,026
- 6,741
- 136
Will they use glue to put it back together?They'll just rebrand it and launch it again in a couple of days
Saylick
Diamond Member
- Sep 10, 2012
- 4,036
- 9,456
- 136
I wonder what they will then name it?
Core Truths+? Enhanced Core Truths? Core Truths-Refresh?
Hmmm... 🤔
Intel gets flamed and takes down the marketing material calling out AMD’s deceptive mobile naming scheme. That mobile naming scheme was so convulated they literally handed journalists a decoder ring when it was unveiled. Because Intel re-used some alder lake dies and labeled Raptor Lake Refresh as 14th gen they need to burn though. The customers have spoken and decided deceptive marketing is A-Ok if done by the internet’s favorite brand (AMD).
Best analogy I can come up with:
Radeon releases marketing material criticizing nvidia for advertising performance with DLSS3 active saying it’s misleading. They get flamed and have to pull it down because they were a little misleading when stating their perf/watt improvements with RDNA3.
Clearly, one is worst than the other but we’re all supposed to be mad at company X so it doesn’t matter. That’s how it seems to me at least.
Best analogy I can come up with:
Radeon releases marketing material criticizing nvidia for advertising performance with DLSS3 active saying it’s misleading. They get flamed and have to pull it down because they were a little misleading when stating their perf/watt improvements with RDNA3.
Clearly, one is worst than the other but we’re all supposed to be mad at company X so it doesn’t matter. That’s how it seems to me at least.
Last edited:
Intel compares AMD Zen2 architecture in Ryzen 7000 series to snake oil - VideoCardz.com
Intel says competitors are selling half-truths by introducing Zen2 in Ryzen 7000 stack An aggressive Intel campaign is aimed at the AMD Ryzen brand. Intel released a slide deck titled “Core Truths,” positioning it as a playbook designed to inform customers about the nuanced reality behind the...
videocardz.com
Intel was being deceptive themselves in the presentation while pointing out AMD's marketing deception. Pat better have approved it or some underling is gonna feel some heat for causing controversy two weeks before Intel's most important product launch in ages.
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
- Aug 19, 2007
- 4,026
- 6,741
- 136
The mobile naming schame was incredibly stupid. I don't think I have ever been a fan of AMD marketing (Game Cache lol). That Intel page was stupid and deceptive as well. Also, I don't see people saying how great FSR3 is while also saying DLSS3 is fake frames. But we already know who your favorite brand is so, meh.
Hulk
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 1999
- 5,138
- 3,727
- 136
Wow. That reeks of desperation. No wonder they pulled it down so quickly. They demerit AMD for the exact same product segmentation policies they use and "invented." Meaning include last generation processors in the middle to bottom of the stack for next gen processors.
I love it because it shows me that Intel knows they have some real competition.
But hey at least with Intel I know what processor to buy for my kids based on age! What a joke. Fire all the people involved with that waste of time and hire some additional engineers.
I love it because it shows me that Intel knows they have some real competition.
But hey at least with Intel I know what processor to buy for my kids based on age! What a joke. Fire all the people involved with that waste of time and hire some additional engineers.
- Aug 22, 2001
- 32,012
- 32,465
- 146
I got a good laugh reading the hypothesis that Shrout did this as one last 💩 flinging at his former employer with this stunt.
That's the only thing you need to read from that presentation to understand the technical acumen of the moron who authored that pile of lies.
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
- Aug 19, 2007
- 4,026
- 6,741
- 136
Missed that one! Also, never heard of Crossmark before. Had too look it up. Made by BAPCo, and we all know they would never do anything to make Intel look better, like disabling SSE on AMD CPU's, right? At least in part of the benchmark. And hey, let's include eSports in what should be a device being used by a student! And totally omit the fact that AMD iGPU's are far better!
I don’t know if that’s legally defensible. They shouldn’t be able to know what’s going on within AMD’s equivalent of their management engine.
AMD shares paid for the down payment on my first home. I think I can objectively view both brands for what they are.
I think the internet as a whole is a hive mind that’s heavily tilted towards AMD as evidenced by what happened today. I’m literally the only person out of the ~10 people that commented in this thread that’s pointed out that they have a point about AMD’s mobile naming scheme being misleading (despite being a flawed messenger). I mean.. The first digit signifies the year it was “released” despite some of these SKUs containing Zen 2 chips that launched in 2019.
If Apple pointed out that the camera on the Samsung Galaxy was marketed with images captured with professional cameras - would that be valid? Or does Apple get piled on and forced to remove the marketing material because something something iPhone 15 (non-pro) is basically a refreshed iPhone 14?
Thunder 57
Diamond Member
- Aug 19, 2007
- 4,026
- 6,741
- 136
Did you get a bunch at ~$2-4 a share when they were in serious trouble? If so, I envy you. Wish I had gotten some action on that.
If I went back far enough, I could show you me posting about how stupid the marketing was that they needed a wheel with multiple layers to figure stuff out. Marketing people are generally useless fact distorters. That Intel PDF was a joke though. I have no problem calling out stupidity wherever I see it.
That second part about Apple I'm not sure what you are getting at. Samsung using DSLR photos as examples of their phone camera? Apple & Samsung both made nonsense ads where they had someone using a camera on a phone to take a picture of the moon. I remember the Apple commercial where they had a girl with an iPhone getting a better view of the moon than another with a telescope. Total joke.
You dont get it, the Zen 2 SKUs are new ones with a RDNA 2 GPU, it s not like it is the same chips as the 4000 series, heck , they are even fabbed with a 6nm process, that is, almost a half node smaller than Intel 7....
I think I had a small percentage at <$10 share but in general I was scared to go all-in at those prices. In hindsight, it’s obviously a huge regret to not have had the conviction to really invest heavier in those early days. My cost basis when I sold it all was under $20.
Precisely. If Apple made those complaints it’s still valid even if it’s hypocritical. Why shame them into shutting up if what they’re saying is true and is objectively good for the market?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter