Intel "Core Truths" calls out AMD rebranding of old CPU architectures

C

chithanh

Gawd
Joined
Oct 18, 2010
Messages
954
Intel posted a slideset called "Core Truths" which calls out AMD for rebranding old CPU architectures as new.

media_GAgdiZzasAAqgjB.png
media_GAgdn4FboAAgO-n.png


I think this is correct and AMD deserves to be criticized for such preying on unsuspecting buyers. However this is an instance of the Intel pot calling the AMD kettle black, as Intel has also extensively rebranded their CPU architectures in the past. Unforgotten is Skylake and its refreshes which were with us from Core 7th (2015) to 10th (2020) gen. Nowadays we have the 14th gen, which is not new at all compared to 13th gen, which in turn was a mix of new Raptor Lake and rebranded 12th gen Alder Lake CPUs.

A Twitter comment noted that this is may be preparation for the next Intel rebranding to Core 1 series, which will presumably include Meteor Lake, Raptor Lake and perhaps also Alder Lake CPUs.

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-compares-amd-zen2-architecture-in-ryzen-7000-series-to-snake-oil
https://twitter.com/momomo_us/status/1731666819818356987
 
chithanh said:
Intel posted a slideset called "Core Truths" which calls out AMD for rebranding old CPU architectures as new.

View attachment 617919 View attachment 617920

I think this is correct and AMD deserves to be criticized for such preying on unsuspecting buyers. However this is an instance of the Intel pot calling the AMD kettle black, as Intel has also extensively rebranded their CPU architectures in the past. Unforgotten is Skylake and its refreshes which were with us from Core 7th (2015) to 10th (2020) gen. Nowadays we have the 14th gen, which is not new at all compared to 13th gen, which in turn was a mix of new Raptor Lake and rebranded 12th gen Alder Lake CPUs.

A Twitter comment noted that this is may be preparation for the next Intel rebranding to Core 1 series, which will presumably include Meteor Lake, Raptor Lake and perhaps also Alder Lake CPUs.

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-compares-amd-zen2-architecture-in-ryzen-7000-series-to-snake-oil
https://twitter.com/momomo_us/status/1731666819818356987
Click to expand...
Intel forgot the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th Gen Core series cpus?
Edit, and the 14th gen?
 
Last edited:
This is an "own goal" on Intel's part. Their problem is audience. The people likely to see this ad and actually read/care/comprehend it are also the people savvy enough to be aware intel championed the tick, tick, tick, tick... eventual tock -architecture approach.
 
I don't know. I got back and forth on this.

On the one hand, I think it is shitty that they disguise old architectures with new product names. That - to me - is lying to your customers, most of whom do not have the requisite background knowledge to actually know what they are getting.

On the other hand, what really matters is where the rubber meets the road. If AMD's chip performs well in performance benchmarks, and gets decent battery life in battery tests, the exact architecture under the hood shouldn't matter. And if it doesn't do these things, then shame on people for buying a product without researching it first.

The truth is that for anything except the very latest low power, high performance parts, older architectures are fine. And if they mean consumers who don't care about Starfield or Cinebench performance can save a buck or two, it isn't really the end of the world.

Still, transparency is key, and giving 7xxx product names to anything that isn't Zen4 is kind of shameful. The product name generation should match the underlying arch generation.

,,,and again, the whole industry does this crap, so it's not as if AMD should be singled out. But they should ALL cut it out. If you in any way incorporate product generation into your product naming scheme, it better match the actual generation being shipped.
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
I don't know. I got back and forth on this.

On the one hand, I think it is shitty that they disguise old architectures with new product names. That - to me - is lying to your customers, most of whom do not have the requisite background knowledge to actually know what they are getting.

On the other hand, what really matters is where the rubber meets the road. If AMD's chip performs well in performance benchmarks, and gets decent battery life in battery tests, the exact architecture under the hood shouldn't matter. And if it doesn't do these things, then shame on people for buying a product without researching it first.

The truth is that for anything except the very latest low power, high performance parts, older architectures are fine. And if they mean consumers who don't care about Starfield or Cinebench performance can save a buck or two, it isn't really the end of the world.

Still, transparency is key, and giving 7xxx product names to anything that isn't Zen4 is kind of shameful. The product name generation should match the underlying arch generation.
Click to expand...
The whole AMD 7000 series mobile lineup is a mess, I hope AMD and Intel can release something good there in 2024. They are both showing us some wicked PowerPoint's but I'm not seeing any of the product on the shelves.
 
Lakados said:
The whole AMD 7000 series mobile lineup is a mess, I hope AMD and Intel can release something good there in 2024. They are both showing us some wicked PowerPoint's but I'm not seeing any of the product on the shelves.
Click to expand...

I love "powerpoint engineering"
 
When you are losing on every front, price, performance, efficiency, gaming, productivity, desktop, mobile, server, then try to smear your rivals instead of fixing any of the above problems. We can of course also ignore the hypocrisy as well.
 
Last edited:
Zarathustra[H] said:
I don't know. I got back and forth on this.

On the one hand, I think it is shitty that they disguise old architectures with new product names. That - to me - is lying to your customers, most of whom do not have the requisite background knowledge to actually know what they are getting.

On the other hand, what really matters is where the rubber meets the road. If AMD's chip performs well in performance benchmarks, and gets decent battery life in battery tests, the exact architecture under the hood shouldn't matter. And if it doesn't do these things, then shame on people for buying a product without researching it first.

The truth is that for anything except the very latest low power, high performance parts, older architectures are fine. And if they mean consumers who don't care about Starfield or Cinebench performance can save a buck or two, it isn't really the end of the world.

Still, transparency is key, and giving 7xxx product names to anything that isn't Zen4 is kind of shameful. The product name generation should match the underlying arch generation.

,,,and again, the whole industry does this crap, so it's not as if AMD should be singled out. But they should ALL cut it out. If you in any way incorporate product generation into your product naming scheme, it better match the actual generation being shipped.
Click to expand...
Older APUs with Vega graphics aren't going to get the same amount of support as newer generations with NAVI/RDNA-based GPUs. I was looking at a mini pc for my mom, and there's no way I would get something with Vega graphics today. The support just won't be there and problems will arise.
 
I don't see how reusing an architecture on the lowest end cpu in their mobile lineup is comparable to reusing an architecture across the entire desktop lineup but in either case it's not really as misleading as it is annoying.

It gets a little trickier with GPUs since they often add new features with each gen.
 
If MLID's OEM sources are right -- and I think these have been some of his best sources -- several major laptop companies are considering at least a 50/50 mix of AMD and Intel on mobile in the next 12-18 months.

I've said it before, with AMD focusing on a RX 480/580-style bid on the graphics side of things current, they are positioning themselves to be the name to beat in mobile gaming. With their near PS5-performance APUs their discrete cards can't be slouches because no one would buy them if their APUs are hitting close to the same levels of performance (we basically have a new mid-range graphics performance and pricing expectation today that's punching a lot closer to high-end of the past), especially if Intel can't get Battlemage and their onboard graphics up and going...

We can call this for what it really is: total damage control from Intel. It doesn't matter that current Zen is still using some Zen2 stuff. The tech surrounding their cores from 3D caching to incredibly capable onboard graphics means AMDs upcoming lineup completely incomparable to Zen2.

I'm not saying Intel is done for or anything stupid like that. But they clearly see that AMD is going to get their feet in a lot of doors with mobile, and then people are going to play with their Radeon graphics, and that has the potential to get people accustomed to the AMD drivers, ecosystem, and make them appear as a more viable alternative than how many people perceive them today.

AMD outsold Nvidia with Polaris, and they want to do that again. This is their opportunity and they know it, it's not just a strategy of core design. Remember this?

229116554_10222226944556044_1849019848752888461_n.jpg
 
HockeyJon said:
Intel is like “listen to us, we are experts in rehashing architecture”.

No word on whether or not AMD changing the name “Ryzen” to “Skylake” would suddenly make this practice acceptable.
Click to expand...
Intel at least graced us with a generous 5% IPC or so with each of those rehashes, or at least threw us a clock speed increase, or maybe some arbitrary software/hardware tie-in feature?
 
Lakados said:
Intel at least graced us with a generous 5% IPC or so with each of those rehashes
Click to expand...
There were process improvements (Intel 14nm++++) which lead to more performance/higher clocks at same wattage.
Also every generation fixed a couple of security vulnerabilities (Meltdown, Spectre, L1TF, MDS, Retbleed, etc.) which made mitigations unnecessary, which heavily reduced performance on older CPUs depending on workload. But that is technically not an IPC increase, just avoidance of IPC decrease.
 
chithanh said:
Intel posted a slideset called "Core Truths" which calls out AMD for rebranding old CPU architectures as new.

View attachment 617919 View attachment 617920

I think this is correct and AMD deserves to be criticized for such preying on unsuspecting buyers. However this is an instance of the Intel pot calling the AMD kettle black, as Intel has also extensively rebranded their CPU architectures in the past. Unforgotten is Skylake and its refreshes which were with us from Core 7th (2015) to 10th (2020) gen. Nowadays we have the 14th gen, which is not new at all compared to 13th gen, which in turn was a mix of new Raptor Lake and rebranded 12th gen Alder Lake CPUs.

A Twitter comment noted that this is may be preparation for the next Intel rebranding to Core 1 series, which will presumably include Meteor Lake, Raptor Lake and perhaps also Alder Lake CPUs.

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-compares-amd-zen2-architecture-in-ryzen-7000-series-to-snake-oil
https://twitter.com/momomo_us/status/1731666819818356987
Click to expand...

In my opinion, who cares, as long as it performs well for what it is being used for, as Zen 2 was actually quite good, overall. Now, if it is slow or performance is bad, then we have an issue.
 
ManofGod said:
In my opinion, who cares, as long as it performs well for what it is being used for, as Zen 2 was actually quite good, overall. Now, if it is slow or performance is bad, then we have an issue.
Click to expand...

Well, if the case is "who cares?" then why re-brand it? If the R5 7520 is the same silicon as a the R5 4500, why not just keep calling it the R5 4500?



oh that's right, because consumers don't want to buy older products... So a bit disingenuous to rebrand it, isn't it?
 
KazeoHin said:
Well, if the case is "who cares?" then why re-brand it? If the R5 7520 is the same silicon as a the R5 4500, why not just keep calling it the R5 4500?



oh that's right, because consumers don't want to buy older products... So a bit disingenuous to rebrand it, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Because it is a mobile processor designed for laptops? Sounds to me like it is not the same, at least not exactly.
 
My understanding for this in terms of the long and the short is: laptop OEM's want there to be an update every year because that's what helps them push units. Especially in the fall for back to school and the holiday season.

Both Intel and AMD do these numerical updates mostly to please their laptop partners. As soon as I heard that AMD was changing their numbering scheme based on year and not based on process, that more or less solidified that that is what was happening in my mind. It's not really possible for AMD to create a completely new laptop product stack every year. Even Apple still hasn't ironed out a chip a year.

While I suppose this can be looked at as disingenuous, it's also the consumers fault for not understanding the tech to want to push for these kinds of non-existent updates. It's like JC Penny "always being on sale". (I don't want to rehash that story, but the short version is customers prefer things "being on sale" rather than just having a "lower normal price" - even if the end result is the same price).
 
Last edited:
Reviewers: "Intel "14th" gen is disappointing, it's just a mild refresh of 13th gen"

Intel: "quick, put some heat on AMD for renaming old architectures!"

I don't like the naming of Ryzen 7000 mobile at all but coming from Intel this got a hearty eye-roll from me.
 
NattyKathy said:
I don't like the naming of Ryzen 7000 mobile at all but coming from Intel this got a hearty eye-roll from me.
Click to expand...

It makes sense from a marketing perspective, they're getting their Zen and Radeon product lines on the same numeral system.
 
NattyKathy said:
Reviewers: "Intel "14th" gen is disappointing, it's just a mild refresh of 13th gen"

Intel: "quick, put some heat on AMD for renaming old architectures!"

I don't like the naming of Ryzen 7000 mobile at all but coming from Intel this got a hearty eye-roll from me.
Click to expand...
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. I have no problem with companies calling each other out when it's true.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
My understanding for this in terms of the long and the short is: laptop OEM's want there to be an update every year because that's what helps them push units. Especially in the fall for back to school and the holiday season.

Both Intel and AMD do these numerical updates mostly to please their laptop partners. As soon as I heard that AMD was changing their numbering scheme based on year and not based on process, that more or less solidified that that is what was happening in my mind. It's not really possible for AMD to create a completely new laptop product stack every year. Even Apple still hasn't ironed out a chip a year.

While I suppose this can be looked at as disingenuous, it's also the consumers fault for not understanding the tech to want to push for these kinds of non-existent updates. It's like JC Penny "always being on sale". (I don't want to rehash that story, but the short version is customers prefer things "being on sale" rather than just having a "lower normal price" - even if the end result is the same price).
Click to expand...
The OEM number game is 100% a thing, they get upset if you don’t have a new product for their new lineup each year. Consumers hate paying full price for old things and if Google says it came out in 2019 but it’s a new 2023 model you bet that most would pass it by, because who wants to pay full price for a 4 year old laptop.
 
But the Zen 2 and 3 still making the rounds in AMD 7000 series silicon isn’t new news, it was announced in January.
First digit is the year 7=2023, 8=2024
Second digit is the market segment, Athlon(1 or 2), Ryzen 3, 5, 7, 9.
Third digit is the architecture, 2=zen2, 3=zen3, etc.
Fourth digit is the feature/performance segment 0=low, 5=high.
Suffix, for voltage, form factor, etc…

So anything 7x2xy would be a Zen2 part.
 
chithanh said:
Intel posted a slideset called "Core Truths" which calls out AMD for rebranding old CPU architectures as new.

View attachment 617919 View attachment 617920

I think this is correct and AMD deserves to be criticized for such preying on unsuspecting buyers.
Click to expand...
I disagree. To me, it's about price/performance levels. How AMD achieves a price/performance level is what I care about, that is, fast execution of the x86/x64 instruction set. I don't care if the "core internals" include time travel to the planet Mongo, where AMD has super-duper-wooper server farms.


chithanh said:
However this is an instance of the Intel pot calling the AMD kettle black,
Click to expand...
It's a case of Intel desperate to compete with an effective competitor who is eating their lunch, bite by bite. (no pun).
 
UnknownSouljer said:
My understanding for this in terms of the long and the short is: laptop OEM's want there to be an update every year because that's what helps them push units. Especially in the fall for back to school and the holiday season.

Both Intel and AMD do these numerical updates mostly to please their laptop partners. As soon as I heard that AMD was changing their numbering scheme based on year and not based on process, that more or less solidified that that is what was happening in my mind. It's not really possible for AMD to create a completely new laptop product stack every year. Even Apple still hasn't ironed out a chip a year.

While I suppose this can be looked at as disingenuous, it's also the consumers fault for not understanding the tech to want to push for these kinds of non-existent updates. It's like JC Penny "always being on sale". (I don't want to rehash that story, but the short version is customers prefer things "being on sale" rather than just having a "lower normal price" - even if the end result is the same price).
Click to expand...
At the end of the day, it's about price/performance (and heat). I don't care if the packaging is chiplet, or M&M chocolate covered. Or if AMD's new mascot/spokes-monster is Cookie Monster.
 
philb2 said:
At the end of the day, it's about price/performance (and heat). I don't care if the packaging is chiplet, or M&M chocolate covered. Or if AMD's new mascot/spokes-monster is Cookie Monster.
Click to expand...
I mean, yes?
This isn't really news, other than the discovery that Intel PR is getting even worse.
 
Last edited:
Lakados said:
The OEM number game is 100% a thing, they get upset if you don’t have a new product for their new lineup each year. Consumers hate paying full price for old things and if Google says it came out in 2019 but it’s a new 2023 model you bet that most would pass it by, because who wants to pay full price for a 4 year old laptop.
Click to expand...
People don't want to buy a 2019 model over a 2023 model laptop because components are always getting better or cheaper, in this particular case the cpu is going be on the cheaper end and will be in a laptop with an appropriate level of features and performance.
 
Ebernanut said:
People don't want to buy a 2019 model over a 2023 model laptop because components are always getting better or cheaper, in this particular case the cpu is going be on the cheaper end and will be in a laptop with an appropriate level of features and performance.
Click to expand...
Yeah but that’s more research than most people put in they Google the CPU they see the ghz number is the same but one was made in 2019 and the other in 2023, so the 2023 one is obviously the faster unit.
Which is why they rebrand it as a 7235x and not as a 3700u or what ever it was to what ever it is. Bigger newer number is the better number, and thats the best answer they are going to get from the isle in Staples over a cellular connection that for some reason barely works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Axman
like this
Lakados said:
Yeah but that’s more research than most people put in they Google the CPU they see the ghz number is the same but one was made in 2019 and the other in 2023, so the 2023 one is obviously the faster unit.
Click to expand...

Although I will say in this one instance Arc graphics are so toxic that people are actively avoiding computers with that specific Intel branding. People almost instinctively avoid it.

I checked, I went to Costco twice in as many weeks, none of the PCs/laptops had Arc stickers, even if they had Arc parts.
 
Axman said:
Although I will say in this one instance Arc graphics are so toxic that people are actively avoiding computers with that specific Intel branding. People almost instinctively avoid it.

I checked, I went to Costco twice in as many weeks, none of the PCs/laptops had Arc stickers, even if they had Arc parts.
Click to expand...
Yeah there’s too many old bad reviews that come up as the top Google search results. Cheaper and easier to not have stickers than to try to change the search results.
 
Lakados said:
Yeah but that’s more research than most people put in they Google the CPU they see the ghz number is the same but one was made in 2019 and the other in 2023, so the 2023 one is obviously the faster unit.
Which is why they rebrand it as a 7235x and not as a 3700u or what ever it was to what ever it is. Bigger newer number is the better number, and thats the best answer they are going to get from the isle in Staples over a cellular connection that for some reason barely works.
Click to expand...
Anybody that buys a laptop based off of the CPU model is already way ahead of the average shopper and isn't likely to be fooled. The average buyer looks at the features(screen size, battery life, weight) and performance assuming they look farther than price.

On a separate note I saw the rest of the slides posted somewhere and I have to say Intel comparing this to snake oil and used car salesman is a hoot because it applies to the ad campaign more than what AMD is doing here.
 
Ebernanut said:
Anybody that buys a laptop based off of the CPU model is already way ahead of the average shopper and isn't likely to be fooled. The average buyer looks at the features(screen size, battery life, weight) and performance assuming they look farther than price.
Click to expand...
Kinda. Basically all that matters is that:
Bigger number > Smaller number

We're not talking about anything sophisticated here.
If you don't know anything about processors, you would likely assume that:
14th Gen > 13th Gen
Even to the point that:
14100 > 13900

Hardware enthusiasts know, but moms buying laptops for their kid going to College? Likely not at all.
 
Last edited:
UnknownSouljer said:
Kinda. Basically all that matters is that:
Bigger number > Smaller number

We're not talking about anything sophisticated here.
If you don't know anything about processors, you would likely assume that:
14th Gen > 13th Gen
Even to the point that:
14100 > 13900

Hardware enthusiasts know, but moms buying laptops for their kid going to College? Likely not at all.
Click to expand...
I just don't think many even look at the cpu model based on the vast majority of laptop reviews I saw when last looking. Also when I was looking the product tags in stores rarely even mentioned it and when they did is was usually in the small print details section with the cores and speed more prominent than the cpu model.

It's also the smallest number in the current lineup so even going by that they should be fine, nobody ever tries to argue that a 3090ti shouldn't outperform a 4060 and it would be silly to claim it's misleading.
 
Ebernanut said:
I just don't think many even look at the cpu model based on the vast majority of laptop reviews I saw when last looking. Also when I was looking the product tags in stores rarely even mentioned it and when they did is was usually in the small print details section with the cores and speed more prominent than the cpu model.
Click to expand...
Yes, 14th gen > 13th gen.
Ebernanut said:
It's also the smallest number in the current lineup so even going by that they should be fine, nobody ever tries to argue that a 3090ti shouldn't outperform a 4060 and it would be silly to claim it's misleading.
Click to expand...
No one who is technically savvy would try to argue that. People shopping around and only seeing numbers that also aren't technical might incorrectly make assumptions. That's the point.
4000 > 3000. And it's cheaper. Win win!
 
Last edited:
UnknownSouljer said:
Yes, 14th gen > 13th gen.

No one who is technically savvy would try to argue that. People shopping around and only seeing numbers that also aren't technical might incorrectly make assumptions. That's the point.
4000 > 3000. And it's cheaper. Win win!
Click to expand...
Based on available evidence I would assume that the amount of people that care about what cpu is in a laptop and don't understand the difference between generations is almost non-existent, again cpu model is NOT emphasized in any reviews I've seen(if they get that detailed they usually spend more time on whether the cooling is adequate for it) nor is it heavily advertised. If it's not used as a selling point then the average consumer obviously doesn't care so why would it even matter.

I can't imagine any non-biased laptop reviewer thinking this is anything, meanwhile Intel just got recently taken to task by a large portion of reviewers for calling 14th gen a new generation instead of treating it like a mid-gen refresh. This is clearly what they're responding to and the reason they're trying to make this a thing.
 
Ebernanut said:
Based on available evidence I would assume that the amount of people that care about what cpu is in a laptop and don't understand the difference between generations is almost non-existent, again cpu model is NOT emphasized in any reviews I've seen(if they get that detailed they usually spend more time on whether the cooling is adequate for it) nor is it heavily advertised. If it's not used as a selling point then the average consumer obviously doesn't care so why would it even matter.
Click to expand...
When you go to a store, every spec on every machine is clearly labelled. They have to have the rigor there so that people who actually want to buy a machine based on specs can do so.
And it absolutely is used as a selling tool. The part we agree on is that people do not know what the numbers mean. The part we apparently disagree on is the part where consumers who know nothing can't identify that bigger number = better.

They know they want a bigger RAM number, a bigger storage number. They want a bigger CPU number too. They just don't know what CPU number is relevant.

Those dumb stickers on laptops are also a sales tool. Savvy people don't care, but people not in the know pick nVidia or Intel, etc. Which is why OEM's don't want things like ARC branding. Anyway, there are laptop stickers with the Intel gen number listed on the sticker. Alongside i3, i5, i7, i9, etc.
Ebernanut said:
I can't imagine any non-biased laptop reviewer thinking this is anything, meanwhile Intel just got recently taken to task by a large portion of reviewers for calling 14th gen a new generation instead of treating it like a mid-gen refresh. This is clearly what they're responding to and the reason they're trying to make this a thing.
Click to expand...
AMD have maintained their schedule. They have been conservative with their performance improvements. They've been highly communicative. They have hit their launch windows for the past 3 years. In stark contrast to Intel which has pushed back their gens numerous times and not hit their performance numbers. Point being AMD knows their strategy of being restrained is winning. They don't need to respond to Intel at all. Intel has to respond to them. Hence this stupid thread in the first place.

If your reason was the reason, then they would've done this from Intel 10th to 11th to basically also 12th gen.
 
Last edited:
chithanh said:
Intel posted a slideset called "Core Truths" which calls out AMD for rebranding old CPU architectures as new.

View attachment 617919 View attachment 617920

I think this is correct and AMD deserves to be criticized for such preying on unsuspecting buyers. However this is an instance of the Intel pot calling the AMD kettle black, as Intel has also extensively rebranded their CPU architectures in the past. Unforgotten is Skylake and its refreshes which were with us from Core 7th (2015) to 10th (2020) gen. Nowadays we have the 14th gen, which is not new at all compared to 13th gen, which in turn was a mix of new Raptor Lake and rebranded 12th gen Alder Lake CPUs.

A Twitter comment noted that this is may be preparation for the next Intel rebranding to Core 1 series, which will presumably include Meteor Lake, Raptor Lake and perhaps also Alder Lake CPUs.

https://videocardz.com/newz/intel-compares-amd-zen2-architecture-in-ryzen-7000-series-to-snake-oil
https://twitter.com/momomo_us/status/1731666819818356987
Click to expand...
It may be true, but it is not the entire story: given power consumption's relevance for a mobile cpu it is disingenuous at best to forget to mention that those cpu's are produced with an upgraded process.

Apart from that, here's core truth #3 that would be a logical consequence of the other two ones:

Intel's mobile cpu's are so bad that amd can compete with an "outdated" architecture ^_^
 
Last edited:
I swore to myself that I wouldn't bother about CPU/APUs as long as Intel, AMD continued to sell outdated architectures under celeron/athlon brands

Sadly its got worse & the infection has now spread to i-3 (without p-cores) & ryzen 7 products !!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top