152
Intel drops ‘i’ processor branding after 15 years, introduces ‘Ultra’ for higher-end chips (www.engadget.com)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/technology@beehaw.org
60 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 44 points 3 years ago (14 children)

Intel says the rebranding “better aligns to customer requests” to simplify its processor names

But it doesn't simplify the processor name!? Instead of i5, we now have to say "core 5" or "intel core 5".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
    •
  • [–] 25 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Even worse ... we have to specify between "Core 5" and "Core Ultra 5"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 18 points 3 years ago

    "I'd like to order the newest chip you got. The Beyond Plus Ultra Core Ultra 5+ Supreme Deluxe. No, I will not accept the Beyond Plus Ultra Core Ultra 5 Supreme Deluxe. That is last gen garbage from last week."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    I have a feeling everyone's going to end up calling them i9s anyways

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago

    They don't seem to understand where the customer confusion comes from. A lot of people out there don't really realize that a Core i7 could mean very different things because that name has been slapped on new CPUs for...15 years. They delineate product generations as part of a model number (2600k, 6700k, etc). There is so much ambiguity when someone just says their computer has a Core i7, non tech-savvy folk aren't going to remember the string of numbers that comes after that.

    AMD copied them, and that probably leads to similar confusion.

    Apple seems to be the smart one in the room when it comes to CPU naming. The generation of the product is right there in the first part of it's name: M1, M2, etc. The performance class is suffixed (no suffix, Pro, Max, Ultra).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    Before it was Intel Core i5 so it's simpler than the old name

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Well officially yes, but I don't know anyone that consistently called it "Intel Core i5" instead of just "i5". And I don't see that happening with just "5".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago* (3 children)

    "Which processor do you have?" "5"

    said nobody ever

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. "i5" as an answer would've made sense, but "5" doesn't

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    I get it - I was just emphasizing it :P

    Was there a problem with the naming? I don't see why they'd change it given they've spent a long time building the brand.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago

    Ha okay. I wasn't quite sure whether you're emphasizing or did misunderstood me.

    Honestly I have no idea what the issue was with the old naming scheme. Didn't they just recently introduce an i9? Why not continue with an i11 etc instead of this Ultra nonsense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent