Intel Announces "Biggest Brand Update" For Core CPUs

[skeevy420]

So, an Ultra 5 could best a 7 since it goes to 11?

No, that's how you win at Craps.

[Vermilion]

Add this naming scheme to Intel dropping Pentium and Celeron for "Intel Processor" and now we have a branding clusterfuck.

Can't wait for Apple to sue them for branding their processors as Ultra too ...

[macemoneta]

And ECC RAM support? Bueller? Bueller? Are they just gonna leave that to AMD desktop chips and motherboards?

[pWe00Iri3e7Z9lHOX2Qx]

Michael While I assume you mean based on the Intel 4nm process, I still chuckle at the thought of these asan upgraded Pentium 4.

"Intel 4" = 7nm. After flailing around for half a decade with their too aggressive 10nm fiasco, they just renamed the steps on their fab roadmap. These node names have had a marketing spin across the industry for years and aren't ever apples to apples between competitors, but Intel's renaming seems especially egregious.

[SofS]

Simplify? So an Ultra 3 will have more computing capacity than a Core 9? The same word as Apple uses in a completely distinct market?

It will create more confusion than anything. If anything, AMD year/segment/architecture/form factor scheme seems much more reasonable. It conveys more information with less symbols.

[Ironmask]

Simplify? So an Ultra 3 will have more computing capacity than a Core 9? The same word as Apple uses in a completely distinct market?

It will create more confusion than anything. If anything, AMD year/segment/architecture/form factor scheme seems much more reasonable. It conveys more information with less symbols.

It's Intel. They don't care what you think, or even know about their SKUs, they care about how good their sticker looks on the latest disposable Acer laptop.

[stormcrow]

And ECC RAM support? Bueller? Bueller? Are they just gonna leave that to AMD desktop chips and motherboards?

No. Apparently they're "allowing" ECC RAM support for Alder Lake on certain motherboard chipsets. I seriously had to spit after I wrote that. The effin arrogance of Intel is astounding at times. It's also apparent that their CPUs have had the capability all along, they just chose to disable it on desktop SKUs.

Regardless, I still won't buy an Intel branded system even though I've decided future desktops I buy must have ECC RAM. Their artificial SKU distinctions just turn my stomach. I just went through a series of data corruption discoveries in large archives on this desktop not caused by storage device problems. That basically narrows down the field to either certain AMD boards or server boards that can actually use ECC RAM, or Power systems. Not even the new Mac Pro has ECC RAM any longer, so Apple is out, too. I think that's a major mistake on Apple's part for a high end system.

[bug77]

One, Two
Intel's looking for you
Three, Four
It's still called a Core
Five, Six
We hope Ultra sticks
Seven, Eight
It'll be a Something Lake
Nine, Ten
Our numbers copied Ryzen

I know you were scrambling for a rhyme (pretty funny, really), but how exactly did Intel's numbers copy Ryzen? Barring the first Ice Lake gen shenanigans, Intel's scheme is in place since the first Core CPUs, 14 years ago. If anything, AMD copied the 3/5/7/9 tiering.

Michael While I assume you mean based on the Intel 4nm process, I still chuckle at the thought of these asan upgraded Pentium 4.

Remember Intel has dropped nm, since everybody uses nm with no connection to actual physical dimensions whatsoever.

[Anux]

And between all those words, I still didn't get the distinction between Ultra and non-Ultra.

Probably ultra high power consumption.

[skeevy420]

I know you were scrambling for a rhyme (pretty funny, really), but how exactly did Intel's numbers copy Ryzen? Barring the first Ice Lake gen shenanigans, Intel's scheme is in place since the first Core CPUs, 14 years ago. If anything, AMD copied the 3/5/7/9 tiering.

Yeah, I know. Instead of correcting the earlier posts I jumped on the bandwagon. Feel free to check. I wasn't the first one in this thread to imply Intel copied AMD's numbering and not the other way around.

Sometimes you gotta lie to kick it.

Remember Intel has dropped nm, since everybody uses nm with no connection to actual physical dimensions whatsoever.

Oh geez. So 4 is just a throwback, spiffy number for them? Just like Core is a throwback, spiffy word? I swear to God that Intel is becoming more and more like that guy who peaked in life during his senior year of High School football....and ended up as a Trumper Republican because he thinks "Ultra" is a cool word to go with his Super Duper Missiles.

American missiles are the best. They're Super Duper missiles. They never miss because they're powered by Ultra Cores.