Are you serious? Cause I can't tell
The naming scheme of Apple chips is objectively inferior and more prone to confusion if the users don't include the entire string which Apple themselves do not include everywhere (see above).
One cannot from the reported SoC name determine the configuration of the CPU nor the iGPU. Meanwhile with Intel and AMD naming schemes you can from the chip name alone determine this using a simple Google query. Apple is above such useful naming. Or - as Doug S already showed by linking to a 3rd party site keeping track of Apple SKUs - they don't want to show users that because they did the same thing with Intel Macs. But even there machdep.cpu.brand_string had a real model number unlike Apple Silicon Macs.
Complimenting their SoC naming scheme as superior is like calling a language superior for having only one word for blue and green. It's simpler but a bit useless when one calls color of the sky and of the grass by the same name. Note that to figure out which SoC you actually have one must ask instead which model MacBook do I have. This alone is indicative of naming scheme failure. But then you end up with some model number like MPHE3LL which are only tracked by 3rd party databases instead of easily searchable on Apple.com. Despite having far fewer SoC SKU they still managed to mess up their naming scheme nearly as much as AMD.
Qualcomm has a clean slate and hopefully will do something sensible instead of Qualcomm Snapdragon X Hyper Ultra Pro Max Final Turbo Special Champion Edition where they still need, somehow, to specify how many cores are included too. I'm optimistic everyone on earth (except Apple) can come up with a SoC naming scheme that actually works by the CPUID name string alone. That is to say I am very serious and hope Qualcomm marketing does NOT copy Apple marketing.
Sent from my MacBook Pro.