Question Intel Processor 300 - 2C/4T LGA1700

[VirtualLarry]

Not a great showing.

 

[burninatortech4]

Not shocked. I do appreciate RandomGaming though. He always puts a fun spin on hardware (even pointless hardware).

 

[VirtualLarry]

Does the release of the "Processor 300", mean that the venerable 12100(F) and 12400(F) are going away soon?

 

[SteinFG]

No, it's just that Pentium and Celeron names are discontinued. 12400F is still Intel's most price-effective chip, and it still supports DDR4. Gonna be sold for quite some time

 

[NTMBK]

Is there a text version of this?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Is there a text version of this?

Not that I know of. Sorry. Is 10 min too much time to waste reading / viewing about Intel's latest?

 

[mikeymikec]

No, it's just that Pentium and Celeron names are discontinued.

I decided to query this by googling:

Intel® Processor Names, Numbers and Generation List

Understanding Intel® processor names and numbers helps identify the best laptop, desktop, or mobile device CPU for your computing needs.

www.intel.com

Intel® Processor

Finally, we introduced a new processor for the value product space: Intel® Processor—a new offering that will replace the Intel Pentium® and Intel Celeron® branding.

Intel is continuing to offer existing Intel® Pentium® Silver and Intel® Pentium® Gold processors.
<followed by a kind-of explanation of the internally conflicting naming schemes at work there, let alone previous statements on this page>

Overall I don't feel any wiser for reading that page with regard to Intel's new naming scheme. Is it new? Is it just a few extra brands added to the existing line-up to muddy the waters? Does anything replace the old e.g. 14th gen naming scheme or does that carry on as usual?

My reaction:

I wish they would just do something simple like the following brands:

Intel Server processors
Intel Desktop processors (desktop CPUs)
Intel Mobile processors (for mobile devices)

And then do a numbering scheme inside each brand that indicates core count etc.

When scrolling back up the page for the umpteenth time, I just noticed a bit of text on the left (which is hidden by the time one reaches the part of the page that talks about Pentium/Celeron):

Updated naming conventions, including the Intel® Processor, the new brand name for our value processors, that will replace Intel Pentium® and Intel Celeron® branding.

... why are they explaining their old branding? It sounds to me like they expect Pentium/Celeron processors to be sold for quite some time, but didn't want to wait to explain the new stuff.

 

[coercitiv]

Overall I don't feel any wiser

I suspect that not even Intel management knows what's happening with their product naming anymore. My best guess would be that Intel tried to rethink their naming strategy from the ground up and ultimately failed in decision committee hell. Everything looks half done, as if the new strategy was partially reverted in favor of the old one.

No single individual can come up with such a bad naming scheme. You need a company to do that:

 

[SteinFG]

Is it new?

Previously the tiering was like this:
Intel Core ...
Intel Pentium ...
Intel Celeron ...

Now it's like this:
Intel Core Ultra ...
Intel Core ...
Intel ... (just intel processor, without any extra words attached)

What was previously Pentium and Celeron are now just Intel CPUs with no extra wording.

 

[mikeymikec]

Previously the tiering was like this:
Intel Core ...
Intel Pentium ...
Intel Celeron ...

Now it's like this:
Intel Core Ultra ...
Intel Core ...
Intel ... (just intel processor, without any extra words attached)

What was previously Pentium and Celeron are now just Intel CPUs with no extra wording.

Are you stating for a fact that the "Intel Core xth gen" branding is going to be retired (a citation would be good)? Because that's not what that page says... and if that page intended to say that then it's telling us that 14th gen's replacements are not as good for gaming as 14th gen was...