Intel announces biggest processor rebranding in 15 years ahead of Meteor Lake launch

[zamroni111]

When the product innovation stucks, marketing team makes this kind of "innovation"

 

[zamroni111]

Ultra power consumption

 

[Mr Majestyk]

Just when you thought AMD's laptop rebranding scheme was lame, Intel says hold my beer.

It's not going to affect tech savvy buyers at all, but it will confuse a lot of the general public. Still I don't rate it as a egregious as AMD with their laptop branding. It would be very easy to buy a Rembrandt apu thinking you are getting latest Zen 4 Phoenix.

 

[Kashim]

It's not going to affect tech savvy buyers at all, but it will confuse a lot of the general public.

Maybe that's their goal. It's never a good sign when a company re-brands their products just for the sake of re-branding. It's even worse when they start adding Super/Hyper/Ultra/Extreme at the end of product names.

 

[Gezzer]

The way I read this is Intel is going to reduce it's overall model count. 3 main stream and 3 high performance. I guess at this point their process is so mature that they simply don't need a ton of SKUs to make the most of each wafer.

 

[sorten]

I dunno. I think the new branding is pretty sharp ;-) Considering all the trouble I've been having with hardware virtualization support on my Ryzen 3600 (an otherwise excellent CPU) I'm open to a return to Intel.

 

[guillejp]

I’ll have two number 9s, a number 9 large, a number 6 with extra dip, a number 7, two number 45s, one with cheese, and a large soda.

 

[bandit8623]

Should have went with -- best bester bestest

 

[Blqckout]

I see a lot of comments like this, but actually I think it makes it clearer assuming they're matching the Y, U, H, S and X-series lines. Y = Mobile, U = Ultra(book), S = Standard, H = Hyper, and X = Extreme all are way easier to remember and more descriptive. Plus it means you don't have to dig into product specifications every time you want to find out which series of processor it carries because it'll now be in the name.

why would Y be mobile? just name it M for mobile

 

[rmcrys]

I bet Intel thinks this new marketing shtick will sell more processors. It probably will to the technically illiterate, ... Intel has fallen so far behind, they cannot figure out a way to regain their "leadership" ...
My advice to Intel, get off your lazy a$$es and over-inflated egos.

Intel is the king and will remain the king because they "own" most OEMs as most can definitely see: Dell, Microsoft, etc etc etc use Intel on over 90% (or more) of their products. It's impossible for AMD to sell there as Intel is aggressive and in the US no-one complains (and in Europe they even care less as that is not their fight).

AMD has great performance, very good energy consumption and fantastic GPUs ... why doesn't Dell and Microsoft use their latest chips as they aren't more expensive than Intel's and have much better specs? The answer is... you know it.

So, as long as Intel is on top, as long as they remain somewhat competitive, their marketing and deep pockets take care the rest.

I assume that they will use the standard chips to replace the Celeron, Pentium and low end i3 (eventually monolithic, old architecture, UHD gpu) and the "Ultra" for the high end i3, i5, i7, i9 with the new architecture and Xe graphics.

 

[Puiu]

This sounds like a person who feel personally attacked by a company that doesn't even know they exist. How has Intel fallen behind? Also what ego? Do you remember how much the 1800x cost at launch?
Intel was held back by their foundry and the difficulty with making CPUs while AMD sold their foundry and paid someone else to manufacture their CPUs. Intel's foundry couldn't keep up with their CPU designerm, but they've moved over to 10nm a while back and will be moving to a multi-tile design with this new generation. What what are you mad about?

What CPU did AMD have in the same price range as the 12400? Do you remember how much the 1800x cost when it came out?

Why are you so angry? None of these tech companies cares about you or any of us. If the prices were too high, too few people would pay that price and the prices would go down. Look at the prices of the Ryzen 1800x they dropped shortly after launch and then kept dropping until enough people started buying them. Don't like a product at the retail price? You have more than Intel to be mad at. You have all the other people who spent their own money on the thing you couldn't justify spending your money on. And that's why GPU prices are so high, because enough people bought the previous overpriced graphics cards letting NVIDIA and AMD know they priced them high enough, but not too high.

Why are you posting such an angry rant under an article about marketing for a new CPU family very few know any specifics about? Are you mad about the performance of a product that doesn't exist, yet?

I remember. The 1800x undercut intel's own 8 core CPUs by more than 50%. Intel had CPUs at 1100$ and 1500$ and the 1800x was 500.

"What CPU did AMD have in the same price range as the 12400?"
For a while nothing that offered similar bang for the buck, until they finally reduced the prices of the 5600/5600x. Competition FTW and nowadays the 7600 is the same price as the 13400.

 

[GeorgeSorosSmell]

He isn't wrong on this, Intel is significantly behind AMD and Apple in power efficiency. This is masked on the desktop market where power consumption is not that critical and they can make up for it by using very high TDPs (I.e. selling 250W furnaces like the 13900K), but in the markets where it matters it's pretty clear Intel has a big disadvantage. They're bleeding marketshare to AMD in the server/enterprise market, and they get humiliated by both AMD and Apple on mobile, especially in the ultraportable category, where the Apple M series and the Ryzen U series run circles around Intel's 15W chips.


The Ryzen 5600.

Nonsense. You are wrong. Big little architecture is more efficient than AMD, and the plane has walked away from medley being about nano metre size, Intel has more cores at higher clocks with lower tdp usage than AMDs current chips, without the exploding motherboards extremely picky ram and horde of issues zen 4 owners are having.

 

[GeorgeSorosSmell]

Intel is the king and will remain the king because they "own" most OEMs as most can definitely see: Dell, Microsoft, etc etc etc use Intel on over 90% (or more) of their products. It's impossible for AMD to sell there as Intel is aggressive and in the US no-one complains (and in Europe they even care less as that is not their fight).

AMD has great performance, very good energy consumption and fantastic GPUs ... why doesn't Dell and Microsoft use their latest chips as they aren't more expensive than Intel's and have much better specs? The answer is... you know it.

So, as long as Intel is on top, as long as they remain somewhat competitive, their marketing and deep pockets take care the rest.

I assume that they will use the standard chips to replace the Celeron, Pentium and low end i3 (eventually monolithic, old architecture, UHD gpu) and the "Ultra" for the high end i3, i5, i7, i9 with the new architecture and Xe graphics.

Amd currently does not have good performance outside of its 3d chips though... In every single other area Intel chips outperform outside of unoptimized games and work loads and perform 20% faster this form is stuck in 2010

 

[GeorgeSorosSmell]

Am I the only one who feels this move stinks of desperation? What was that saying, you can polish a turd but it's still going to be a turd?

They are outperforming and by 20% for less money in all areas but the very highest price range? So how is this desperation?
Hahaha.

 

[pencea]

Its not Intel being lazy, its amd.

Wouldn't call them lazy. If it wasn't for AMD releasing Ryzen. Intel would still be selling 4 cores with minimum increase regarding IPC performance.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

why would Y be mobile? just name it M for mobile

No idea why they picked Y, I just came up with the most descriptive words for each. This previous branding update describes all series, and the Y as “Extremely low-power efficient”: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html

 

[rmcrys]

They are outperforming and by 20% for less money in all areas but the very highest price range? So how is this desperation?
Hahaha.

Yes (sarcastic) and Steam and Asus chose AMD chips because they are worse (sarcastic again).

AMD (mobile and high-end) chips are far better than Intel's both on performance/Watt and far more on iGPU performance.

So, which chip would I choose (if I had the chance) for my future Surface Pro 10 or 11:
- a 14th gen Intel (which will drain my battery because it will try to use always the PL2 instead of staying cool, plus a gpu slower than a gtx1650)

OR

- a cooler AMD with certainly comparable CPU performance, better performance/Watt and a MUCH better iGPU?

Tough choice...

Yes it's true that the newer gen is not yet available, etc.. but history tells us that Intel plays with turbo, high consumption and marketing to be "better" than the competition. IF the big players have a good AMD alternative as the Z1 extreme and an Intel option with the final price mirroring the hardware price difference, AMD units would sell very well. But the reality is another thing.

 

[emmzo]

So, Ultra means K? As in unlocked plus graphics chip? Or is it KS? What about KF then? I don't care about dropping the "I" , I just want to to know about the "k", if someone knows better and cares to explain.

 

[wiyosaya]

This sounds like a person who feel personally attacked by a company that doesn't even know they exist. How has Intel fallen behind? Also what ego? Do you remember how much the 1800x cost at launch?
Intel was held back by their foundry and the difficulty with making CPUs while AMD sold their foundry and paid someone else to manufacture their CPUs. Intel's foundry couldn't keep up with their CPU designerm, but they've moved over to 10nm a while back and will be moving to a multi-tile design with this new generation. What what are you mad about?

What CPU did AMD have in the same price range as the 12400? Do you remember how much the 1800x cost when it came out?

Why are you so angry? None of these tech companies cares about you or any of us. If the prices were too high, too few people would pay that price and the prices would go down. Look at the prices of the Ryzen 1800x they dropped shortly after launch and then kept dropping until enough people started buying them. Don't like a product at the retail price? You have more than Intel to be mad at. You have all the other people who spent their own money on the thing you couldn't justify spending your money on. And that's why GPU prices are so high, because enough people bought the previous overpriced graphics cards letting NVIDIA and AMD know they priced them high enough, but not too high.

Why are you posting such an angry rant under an article about marketing for a new CPU family very few know any specifics about? Are you mad about the performance of a product that doesn't exist, yet?

I think you are denying reality and all the BS Intel has tried to peddle, and has been caught peddling, over the years.

Do you remember when they ran that demo a few years back claiming their CPUs were great and all the while, they had an extreme cooling system hidden under the bench at a public demo? That, among other things Intel has done, was pathetic.

I'm simply stating what most everyone knows is obvious; as I see it, you are making excuses for Intel.

Perhaps you should look within to answer your "Why" questions.

 

[wiyosaya]

The way I read this is Intel is going to reduce it's overall model count. 3 main stream and 3 high performance. I guess at this point their process is so mature that they simply don't need a ton of SKUs to make the most of each wafer.

Either that, or they have found that they can no longer sell the distinction between SKUs for the insane prices they have historically charged.

 

[wiyosaya]

Intel is the king and will remain the king because they "own" most OEMs as most can definitely see: Dell, Microsoft, etc etc etc use Intel on over 90% (or more) of their products. It's impossible for AMD to sell there as Intel is aggressive and in the US no-one complains (and in Europe they even care less as that is not their fight).

AMD has great performance, very good energy consumption and fantastic GPUs ... why doesn't Dell and Microsoft use their latest chips as they aren't more expensive than Intel's and have much better specs? The answer is... you know it.

So, as long as Intel is on top, as long as they remain somewhat competitive, their marketing and deep pockets take care the rest.

I assume that they will use the standard chips to replace the Celeron, Pentium and low end i3 (eventually monolithic, old architecture, UHD gpu) and the "Ultra" for the high end i3, i5, i7, i9 with the new architecture and Xe graphics.

Intel's lead has been eroding over the years - especially in the server market. Need I say more?

 

[Blqckout]

No idea why they picked Y, I just came up with the most descriptive words for each. This previous branding update describes all series, and the Y as “Extremely low-power efficient”: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html

Y is

Why

lol

 

[poshflamingos]

Nonsense. You are wrong. Big little architecture is more efficient than AMD, and the plane has walked away from medley being about nano metre size, Intel has more cores at higher clocks with lower tdp usage than AMDs current chips, without the exploding motherboards extremely picky ram and horde of issues zen 4 owners are having.

Literally delusional.

The Ryzen 7950X and the 13900K have the same multithreaded performance, except the 7950X does it with a TDP of 170W while the 13900K needs 250W.

It's even worse on mobile where Intel can't just jack up the TDP. The Ryzen 6800U (15W) is 50% faster than the i7-1265U (also 15W), which has P and E cores but still fails to compete with AMD and Apple.

 

[loki1944]

It's always great to change your product names that guided customer choices for the last almost 15 years. Sowing confusion is always a great sales pitch.

 

[GeorgeSorosSmell]

Literally delusional.

The Ryzen 7950X and the 13900K have the same multithreaded performance, except the 7950X does it with a TDP of 170W while the 13900K needs 250W.

It's even worse on mobile where Intel can't just jack up the TDP. The Ryzen 6800U (15W) is 50% faster than the i7-1265U (also 15W), which has P and E cores but still fails to compete with AMD and Apple.

Intel have the exact same TDP on their chips as AMD hahaha.
Literally the same in fact its lower as amd have a mainstream chip at 170w while Intel's max is 120w, the same is true with amds other chips, so your calling people "Delusional" because your fabricated nonsense does not correlate with reality?