• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

New Intel Naming System?

Oldie

Oldie

Mean Old Administrator
2FA
Joined
Jan 12, 2004
Messages
21,915
Fair warnig, this is a link from the inq!

Intel to Dump Numbering Scheme, and Start New One

The Inq said:
The newer system uses letters and numbers in the form X00, the first letter being the the class differentiator, the first number most likely being the family, the second being speed, and the two trailing zeros add '1337'-ness.
Click to expand...

It is almost universally accepted that Intels current naming scheme adds unnecessary confusion for the average consumer. That said, this doesn't sound like it's any better. I understand the need to communicate more than the clock speed, but for pitys sake, use some of that gigantic cash reserve to get some decent marketing ideas.

 
Well there are alot of 3Ghz cpu's put there... ;)

There's the 533mhz (3.06Mhz)
There's 3.0Ghz (800mhz northwood)
There's 3.0Ghz (800Mhz prescott 478pin)
There's 3.0Ghz (800mhz prescott lga775pin)
There's 3.0Ghz (800mhz DUAL CORE lga775pin)

Hehehe...
 
Also, 1mb cache 3.0ghz prescott on LGA775 and 2mb cache 3.0ghz prescott on LGA775.

I can't really believe Intel is switching to this 6 digit crap.
 
It would've been much better if Intel just took the Automakers' way of differentiating their models...by using yearly connotations. For example:

  • 2005 Celeron 3 L (Low Voltage)
  • 2006 Pentium M 5 U (Ultra-Low Voltage)
  • 2007 Pentium VIIV 7 N (Normal Voltage)
  • 2008 Xeon VIIV 9 H (High Voltage)

I'm just making up numbers/letters here, but you get the point. The only "problem" I can foresee is that Intel would have to stick to releasing new CPU's each year, or they could skip a year (so then you wouldn't have, say, year 2007 chips, only 2006 and 2008). If they have to release new products twice a year, they could use 2006.1 for the first edition and maybe 2006.6 for the next revision (or 2006.0/2006.5 if you like). It may look complicated, but it sure will cut down on the ridiculous amount of cryptic numbers and actually make sense once you break it down. Just my helpful 0.02¢. ;)
 
There has always been something fishy about AMD/Cyrix/Nexgen cpus.

I'm sticking with INTEL on my next build. Besides I can't tell the difference between 63 fps on AMD vs 60 fps on INTEL.
 
I had almost become accustomed to the 5-, 6-, and 700 series names and now they might switch again? To MORE numbers? I really did like it more when it used a letter like 2.4C, 2.4B, 3.0E, etc.

I'd rather have a system like - [CPU Family] [CPU Core] [EMT64 designator] [dual core designator]

Having text is way easier than numbers. :eek:
 
I don't really care, as long as they don't do as AMD have always done. I hate their numbering system. I always loved Intel's simple way of doing it. P4 2.4C for example. That tells you everything you need to know without having to memorize much, whereas with AMD, you have to memorize every separate core and frequency.
 
They should have stuck with the 8088,8086 / 80x86. I had just gotten used to that numbering system when they switched.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top