Intel's new branding mess...

[Viditor]

A funny and inciteful little article...
Tweaktown

"Intel will simply do away with the Core brand and replace it with Core i3, i5 and i7, with Core i3 and Core i5 being ?new modifiers? joining the Core i7 family. Apparently upcoming processors like Lynnfield will ?carry the Intel Core brand, but will be available as either Intel Core i5 or Intel Core i7 depending upon the feature set and capability.? As for Clarksfield (mobile), it ?will have the Intel Core i7 name"...

Now forgive us for nitpicking here, but Core 2 Duo versus Core 2 Quad versus Core i3, Core i5 and Core i7 ? explain how this simplifies things?...

Intel Core i3 will be entry-level, Intel Core i5 will be mid-level and Intel Core i7 will be high-level, but that Intel will still have Celeron for entry-level computing and Pentium for basic computing as well as Atom for netbooks and MIDs. So, if entry level core is Core i3 but entry level computing is Celeron, what on earth is the difference between entry level CPU versus computing?

I certainly know the difference, and I am sure that most here do as well. But for the average computer buyer, I think they have a point...

 

[Eeqmcsq]

It's still a bit mind boggling to me right now. Unless the final numbering scheme makes it obvious, trying to figure out the # of cores at a glance will also be annoying. That's one part of AMD's naming scheme I like: the X for the # of cores. It's straight forward and easily scales for future number of cores.

 

[Forumpanda]

Too many marketing people spoil the information? .. something like that anyway.

I do think there is some point to the madness though, isn't it just a different number for each socket?
So that when joe average goes out to buy computer parts he just needs to make sure it says i# on the box.

At least so far they don't have a i# line with both dual and quad cores in it, so its hard to tell how they will differentiate between them, presumably there will be some clue.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: Forumpanda
Too many marketing people spoil the information? .. something like that anyway.

I do think there is some point to the madness though, isn't it just a different number for each socket?
So that when joe average goes out to buy computer parts he just needs to make sure it says i# on the box.

At least so far they don't have a i# line with both dual and quad cores in it, so its hard to tell how they will differentiate between them, presumably there will be some clue.

What I see happening is that JSP will go out there, and having never heard of i3,i5,i7 or Core2, he'll buy the name he knows and trusts...Pentium. Hell, Intel always named their flagship products Pentium before, they must still be doing that. And nobody got fired for buying a Pentium...

 

[SunSamuraix]

I have to admit its pretty bad. Some fool was incharge of this thinking if they didnt do something different they would be out of the job.

How about this;

Pentium: Mainstreem
Core: Enthusiast
Xeon: Server
Celeron: Budget
Atom: Portable and extremely low power devices.

Now to each of those attach a number. Higher = Better. 200 series can have 2 processors. 400 can have 4. The Core brand doesnt BS you and always has HT on. Celerons do not, nor do Pentiums. Pentiums would have a better/bigger cache system then the Celerons.
Well it would simplify it for me anyway. When I think Pentium after a while, Id know it would simply be better than a Celeron, but not as good as a Core for those two simple reasons. All anyone building a new system would see on Newegg for the most part is Core/Pentium/Celeron. Each for their own place in the home. I think people have a better time recognizing names before the numbers that distinguish their performance level.

 

[StinkyPinky]

Yeah I don't understand it and I work in IT. How the hell is the average person going to grasp it?

Poor showing Intel. hire some new marketing people.

 

[Eeqmcsq]

I have a guess as to what Intel might be up to, at least for i3 and i5. The i5 promises 4 threads + turbo, while the i3 promises 4 threads, no turbo. The 4 threads come from either 4 individual cores, or 2 cores + HT. I think Intel is doing the harvesting trick for bad CPUs the same way AMD does it for Phenom II X4 8xx, X3 7xx, and X2 5xx. A normal CPU is an i5 with 4 cores, no HT, and turbo. If 1 or 2 of the cores are bad, you disable 2 cores, turns on HT to get 4 threads, and turbo. If turbo doesn't work, then you have an i3 with 4 cores, no HT. If turbo doesn't work AND 1 or 2 cores go bad, then you disable 2 cores, and turn on HT to get 4 threads.

So perhaps Intel hides all this by simply promising 4 threads with turbo (i5) or no turbo (i3). What do you guys think of this guess?

 

[Avalon]

While there is certainly a lot of branding going on, I'm becoming very interested in the i3 series. From everything I've read, i3 is simply an i5 without Turbo mode, which won't concern me because I'll be overclocking. If there is a 4 core i3 that can clock decently, I think we will have a cheap overclocking winner on our hands.

 

[arkcom]

Originally posted by: Avalon
While there is certainly a lot of branding going on, I'm becoming very interested in the i3 series. From everything I've read, i3 is simply an i5 without Turbo mode, which won't concern me because I'll be overclocking. If there is a 4 core i3 that can clock decently, I think we will have a cheap overclocking winner on our hands.

Yeah, I'm pretty happy with my i7. If i3 clocks to the high 3ghz's, I probably won't be so happy (I've got ht and turbo turned off...). Triple channel benchmarks very well, but real world difference is only a couple fps in games (that could change in the future though).

 

[OCGuy]

Check out the GPU sub-forum if you want to learn about AMD's rediculous naming schemes.


Also, AMD named PHII the same as the i7 chips that were out before it. They couldnt pick other names besides 9XX? Trying to confuse people....?


The "average" computer buyer buys what their computer-savy son tells them, or what the guy at bestbuy tells them.

You and me actually do research, so the naming isnt really important....

But you went after Intel and nV in the same thread title, both competition. :roll:

 

[TuxDave]

If it was just i3, i5, i7 and we got rid of Celerons, Pentiums, Core2 whatevers that would be pretty straight forward for most consumers. Higher number = better. What I'm afraid of is when the 2012 product comes out, are they going to keep the i3, i5, i7 names or are they going to rebrand the whole thing again.

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: OCguy
Check out the GPU sub-forum if you want to learn about AMD's rediculous naming schemes.


Also, AMD named PHII the same as the i7 chips that were out before it. They couldnt pick other names besides 9XX? Trying to confuse people....?


The "average" computer buyer buys what their computer-savy son tells them, or what the guy at bestbuy tells them.

You and me actually do research, so the naming isnt really important....

But you went after Intel and nV in the same thread title, both competition. :roll:

I went after nobody, I just posted the article (the Nvidia comment is paraphrased from the article)
Don't be so sensitive...

As to what is bought, there must be some product recognition involved, or Intel is wasting an awful lot of money on their advertising...

 

[Viditor]

Originally posted by: arkcom

Originally posted by: Avalon
While there is certainly a lot of branding going on, I'm becoming very interested in the i3 series. From everything I've read, i3 is simply an i5 without Turbo mode, which won't concern me because I'll be overclocking. If there is a 4 core i3 that can clock decently, I think we will have a cheap overclocking winner on our hands.

Yeah, I'm pretty happy with my i7. If i3 clocks to the high 3ghz's, I probably won't be so happy (I've got ht and turbo turned off...). Triple channel benchmarks very well, but real world difference is only a couple fps in games (that could change in the future though).

For me it's all about virtualization...I plan on running at least 4 different machines on my next system (especially with Windows 7 on the way).
But that's performance...this thread is about marketing.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Viditor
I certainly know the difference, and I am sure that most here do as well. But for the average computer buyer, I think they have a point...

My take on this is that Intel marketing guys were in a spot due to the desire to sell hyperthreading as essentially legitimate full cores but in the meantime they were in the midst of a core race with AMD.

How do you make it easy for the consumer to buy a 2C/4T westmere chip at a performance/pricepoint that makes it competitive with a 4C AMD processor?

If your branding approach still incorporates some outward indicator of the number of cores under the IHS (C2D and C2Q) then you set yourself up for an uphill battle as all your 2C/4T chips are going to be viewed as being dual-core cpus competing with AMD's 3-core and 4-core chips at similar pricepoints...it plays right into AMD's marketing hands.

So they have to shift the labeling scheme around now in order to mask not only the clockspeed but also the number of cores so that the processor label doesn't enable snap comparisons between processors when the consumer is buying them. Muddle the labeling enough and all the consumer is going to see is:

Intel cpu XYZ @ $250 versus AMD cpu ABC @ $250

All they see now is Intel vs. AMD at same pricepoint and they will assume "well if they are priced the same then they probably perform close to the same, maybe the Intel performs slightly better (been hearing that for years now from my brother-in-law), and Intel has all the platform stability and aren't likely to pull a GM or Chrysler on me, so what have I got to lose by going with the similar priced Intel computer?".

AMD has no choice but to try and invoke a "more cores is better" snap judgment marketing label since they don't have SMT, so X4/X3/X2 is here to stay for a while.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I would much rather have a 4C AMD chip than a 2C/4T Intel one.

 

[SunSamurai]

Depends on what you're running, but... duh?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
I would much rather have a 4C AMD chip than a 2C/4T Intel one.

Regardless of IPC/clockspeed, power-consumption and cost?

Personally I would not want either chip if it cost more, performed less, and took more juice than the alternative.

 

[Modelworks]

Marketing + Tech rarely works for the public benefit. It is like how they name home audio equipment. Engineers design something calling it Model #15a . Marketing renames it to ST5000XL++


They need to drop the core stuff and just sell them like i5,i6,i7 cpu. Make each one a preset Ghz increasing with the number after the i. People don't know what a hertz is anyway.

Would simplify the market a lot. This program requires a i5 cpu minimum , i7 recommended. Just drop all the extra fluff.

 

[arkcom]

They should only have i5 and i7, each on their own sockets (named x5 and x7 or s5 and s7, or whatever). It gets too confusing when someone can go buy an i7 and has to worry about which socket it fits in.

 

[imported_Shaq]

Originally posted by: arkcom
They should only have i5 and i7, each on their own sockets (named x5 and x7 or s5 and s7, or whatever). It gets too confusing when someone can go buy an i7 and has to worry about which socket it fits in.

Exactly. You have to worry what socket your i7 will work in. I thought Intel was making the X58 an i7 exclusive? Now they are making some i7s that will only work in a P55 motherboard. Intel needs to reign in the marketing department and market products that actually make sense for average buyers. i7 for X58 and i5 and i3 for P55 is far less confusing.

 

[Cookie Monster]

I can already imagine a number of new threads of "OMG.. my i7 isnt compatible with my motherboard!! what gives?!".

 

[Zensal]

I actually had the same problem with AMDs Athlon64 3000+. Got a 754 mobo and a 939 CPU from Fry's. Sales guy who did the paperwork on the processor didn't notice either.

Not fun.

 

[aigomorla]

i heard i3 = dualcore with HT

i5 dual core and quadcore variants with and without HT.

i7 is the benchmark smacking high end platform.

But u guys... want me to confuse the heck out of u more...

What will gulftown be called? i9?

 

[cusideabelincoln]

^Is i5 going to hve HT? I thought i7 is also going to come out in socket 1157, and these are the quad cores that will have HT.

At least the charts in AT's preview shows that to be the case:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuch...ts/showdoc.aspx?i=3585

 

[Cogman]

Meh, it could be worse. Nvidias nameing scheme often makes no sense. "The 8800GTX which is faster then the 8800GTS but slower then the 9800GTS, which is slower then the 260GTUPBERUPnex"

I like the ATI/AMD naming scheme. First number, generation, second number, speed, 3rd number... ummm, well, you just need a third number . It at least semi makes sense.