Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

boringtextreviews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 142 posts

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#21

Post by MuffinFlavored »

jzb wrote: post #7

“The “i” branding is extremely powerful with the average consumer and removing it is bound to cause confusion amongst consumers who aren’t technically-inclined.” Who’s the “average” consumer here? I’m skeptical that the majority of PC buyers have internalized the “i” branding. Gamers, sure. But average consumers? I’ve talked a number of less computer savvy friends and family through computer purchases and there was a…

> “The “i” branding is extremely powerful with the average consumer and removing it is bound to cause confusion amongst consumers who aren’t technically-inclined.”

I feel like you're either in one of two groups:

1. a PC "nerd" (kind of deragotory) who is obsessed with specs all the way down to things like L2 cache size, etc.

2. somebody who has 0 clue what any computer/laptop specification means whatsoever

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#22

Post by ethbr0 »

deaddodo wrote: post #16
ethbr0 wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When they were first released they were. i3: single core, hyperthreading i5: multi core, no hyperthreading i7: multi core, hyperthreading It only jumped the shark once hyperthreading stopped being a differentiating feature, and Intel tried to retcon equivalent performance levels into their previous numbering system. Edit : Nehalem (~2008). Apparently i3 didn't exist until the Westmere die shrink?

This was true for only the first generation (Nehalem): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nehalem_(microarchitecture) And they didn't even have an i3 model. What you refer to as the i3 above was still branded as "Celeron". The immediate successor (Westmere) didn't follow this convention at all: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westmere_(microarchitecture) All of the i3 and i5s of that generation were MC+SMT.

Looked up the history and got there the same time as you.

Hindsight is 20/20, so I see how Intel ~2008 could have thought "Maybe SMT will fail in real world scenarios, so we don't want it on our entire product line."

But at some point relatively soon after that it was clear that SMT worked well and they could cram it into every chip.

That's when they really should have ditched the i* and converted to a new system.

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#23

Post by MBCook »

jzb wrote: post #7

“The “i” branding is extremely powerful with the average consumer and removing it is bound to cause confusion amongst consumers who aren’t technically-inclined.” Who’s the “average” consumer here? I’m skeptical that the majority of PC buyers have internalized the “i” branding. Gamers, sure. But average consumers? I’ve talked a number of less computer savvy friends and family through computer purchases and there was a…

While somewhat ridiculous, I kind of feel like they might’ve been better off if they were currently selling the Pentium 17.

Anyone can look at 17 and compare it to the number on their older computer (say Pentium 14) and know it’s better.

Apple is doing this right so far with the M chips, but they’re about to be on #3. We’ll see how long they stick with it. They have so far in phones.

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#24

Post by leidenfrost »

gjsman-1000 wrote: post #12
klodolph wrote: post #6

I do think the i3/i5/i7/i9 monikers are actually pretty confusing, just speaking as someone who has been using computers much longer than the brand existed. Problem is that a CPU from 2009 is going to be called an “i5” and there are just so many people who say they have an “i5” or “i7” without knowing what generation it is from.

This is especially true after the last few years of CPU innovation. A 2023 Core i3-13100 beats a 2018 Core i7-8700K, at least in Passmark, in single and multi. Let alone a 2009 Core i7…

... looks like I'll need to upgrade the CPU soon lol

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#26

Post by MBCook »

MuffinFlavored wrote: post #21
jzb wrote: post #7

“The “i” branding is extremely powerful with the average consumer and removing it is bound to cause confusion amongst consumers who aren’t technically-inclined.” Who’s the “average” consumer here? I’m skeptical that the majority of PC buyers have internalized the “i” branding. Gamers, sure. But average consumers? I’ve talked a number of less computer savvy friends and family through computer purchases and there was a…

> “The “i” branding is extremely powerful with the average consumer and removing it is bound to cause confusion amongst consumers who aren’t technically-inclined.” I feel like you're either in one of two groups: 1. a PC "nerd" (kind of deragotory) who is obsessed with specs all the way down to things like L2 cache size, etc. 2. somebody who has 0 clue what any computer/laptop specification means whatsoever

> somebody who has 0 clue what any computer/laptop specification means whatsoever

Life was so easy in the MHz-wars days.

The bigger number was basically always better, and you could easily tell by how much.

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#27

Post by leetcrew »

klodolph wrote: post #6

I do think the i3/i5/i7/i9 monikers are actually pretty confusing, just speaking as someone who has been using computers much longer than the brand existed. Problem is that a CPU from 2009 is going to be called an “i5” and there are just so many people who say they have an “i5” or “i7” without knowing what generation it is from.

the leading digits of the SKU get bumped with every generation. this is the same pattern used by nvidia and amd for their gpus and cpus. it's only slightly more opaque than model years for cars.

I've also heard people say things like "my PC has an i7" without understanding the generational context, but the intersection between this group and the population that actually buys individual computer parts is approximately null. it's a lot harder to figure out chipset compatibility than it is to figure out that a 2700k is separated from a 13700k by more than ten years.

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#28

Post by [deleted] »

ethbr0 wrote: post #10
internet2000 wrote: post #5

> The “i” branding is extremely powerful with the average consumer and removing it is bound to cause confusion amongst consumers who aren’t technically-inclined. There's no way this is true. The iNumbers were never used consistently enough to mean anything.

When they were first released they were. i3: single core, hyperthreading i5: multi core, no hyperthreading i7: multi core, hyperthreading It only jumped the shark once hyperthreading stopped being a differentiating feature, and Intel tried to retcon equivalent performance levels into their previous numbering system. Edit : Nehalem (~2008). Apparently i3 didn't exist until the Westmere die shrink?

[deleted]

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#29

Post by UberFly »

That site is really good. Definitely speed dial worthy - thanks for the story. About dropping the "i" - I think Intel is in need of a refresh and a new name wouldn't hurt the brand as a whole. I just hope they'd come up with something sensible and easy for the consumer to understand.

Re: Intel to drop the “I” moniker in upcoming CPU rebrand

#30

Post by userbinator »

MBCook wrote: post #15
klodolph wrote: post #6

I do think the i3/i5/i7/i9 monikers are actually pretty confusing, just speaking as someone who has been using computers much longer than the brand existed. Problem is that a CPU from 2009 is going to be called an “i5” and there are just so many people who say they have an “i5” or “i7” without knowing what generation it is from.

I kind of like what Nvidia has been doing in GPUs. They have series. 1000s, 2000s, 3000s. Each generate is a new series. Then the products inside seem to be in performance order. A 3080 is better than a 3060 is better than a 3020 (if that exists). I know it gets messier than that. The fact that they add the titanium versions kind of screws with it. And in the last year they had that card they had to renumber because…

But at least you know a 3080 is two generations newer than a 1080.

That's similar to what Intel was doing with the numbers following the i{3,5,7,9}:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_processors

Post reply on HN