Intel To Change The Product Name, Again
by Kristopher Kubicki on October 16, 2005 5:06 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
In the newest Intel roadmaps, Intel indicated it would change their product naming schemes, again. For those who thought the three digit product naming system wouldn't last; well, it didn't. Less than 18 months ago Intel changed the way new CPUs would be named by replacing the clock rate with a three digit product name instead. We just got briefed on the newest wave of things to come at Intel.
The new product naming scheme for some mobility processors will change to a five character alphanumeric product name based on the watt usage and general performance. All new Mobility product names will start with one of the following letters:
- E: TDP >50W
- T: TDP 25W to 49W
- L: TDP 15W to 24W
- U: TDP <14W
The next four digits after the TDP estimate will denote the CPU's processor family and performance. For example, T1700 will denote a higher echelon 25-49W Yonah chip. T2700 would denote a high performance Merom processor.
Corresponding features that are added into later Yonah or Merom cores will be denoted in the last two digits of the product name. Although the roadmaps did not indicate this, our sources claimed that two versions of a T1500 - one with VT and one without - might be denoted by a change in the last digit of the product name.
Intel's name scheme will change on all new mobility processors, but our sources close to the roadmap indicate that all Intel processors will get a similar facelift about the same time we expect Conroe, similar to the brand-wide shift of April 2004. Existing mobility chips (Dothan, Banias), will not change. Furthermore, the roadmap also revealed that single core Yonah chips will not have a letter prefix corresponding to the wattage, but this might have just been an idiosyncrasy of the roadmap. Single core M chips based on Yonah will continue to use the three digit nomenclature, however.
Server & Desktop
Although Intel's future server and desktop processors will also get a single letter prefix, for now they will just switch to four digits. Below is a quick rundown of the new 65nm Dempsey Intel processors:
- Xeon MP 7041: 3.0GHz 800FSB
- Xeon MP 7040: 3.0GHz 667FSB
- Xeon MP 7030: 2.8GHz 800FSB
- Xeon MP 7020: 2.66GHz 667FSB
- Xeon 5070: 3.46GHz, 130W
- Xeon 5063: 3.2GHz, 95W
- Xeon 5060: 3.2GHz, 130W
- Xeon 5050: 3.0GHz, 95W
- Xeon 5040: 2.83GHz, 95W
- Xeon 5030: 2.66GHz, 95W
- Xeon 5020: 2.5GHz, 95W
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
Shintai - Monday, October 17, 2005 - link
E=Extreme gaming (Think 2.5Ghz+)T=Transportable/Mobile (Same as todays standard Dothans)
L=Low voltage (Same as todays Low voltage Dothans)
U=Ultra low voltage (Same as todays ultra low voltage Dothans)
Remember this is for LAPTOPS only (Well and bladeservers and some offspring media centers and desktops)
A U1500 is the same as a T1500. The U just using less power.
The 1000 is used by Yonah, the 2000 is gonna be used by Merom.
mino - Monday, October 17, 2005 - link
"U1500 is the same as a T1500"NO, it isn't if you read that correctly and that is the real issue.
And about all You talking abou thow bad AMD's scheme is, sorry guys but AMD has 3 mainstream products:
Sempron
Athlon 64
Athlon 64 X2
between these the performance closely resembles the ratings
turion scheme is also pretty simple:
MT28 => "MT" means model; "28" means performance class - the higher the better
But intel's 753 is clearly far worse performing than 750(i know why). And _many_ people believe otherwise!!!
For anybody without current IT bacground(even if one was on the edge 2yrs ago now he'll be lost at shopping for intel) the Intel's scheme as of right now is just shooting at random.
Shintai - Monday, October 17, 2005 - link
Let me repeat it for you:A U1500 is the same as a T1500. The U just using less power.
Scrogneugneu - Monday, October 17, 2005 - link
Using less power, but offering the same performance?Johnmcl7 - Sunday, October 16, 2005 - link
AMD's naming scheme is currently a joke, it was originally a good idea but the Semprons and A64's threw it out the window, the 3000/3200 area being the best example of the problem.John
SEAWOLF607 - Sunday, October 16, 2005 - link
Seem's too me that Intel didn't learn the first go arounnd. Intel if you read this; The peole do not want crazy naming schemes. Give us the name of the cpu and it's actual speed rating not some crazy numbering system.ksherman - Sunday, October 16, 2005 - link
is there a performace differentce between the different power consumption letters? they really only need two: one for uber-long amazingly thin laptops, and then the other for everything else. MABYE they could add a third one for real-high end DTR notbooks, but those should just use X2's anyway, since you cant take them away from the wallsemo - Sunday, October 16, 2005 - link
the original naming scheme that they replaced made the most sense.e.g.
3.0ghz 512k 800fsb
you know exactly what you are looking for but that's the problem... it all made logical sense so it was absolutely critical that is was canned.
when a joe average is told facts about what it/(s)he is buying, it/(s)he gets confused and shivers at the thought that something it/(s)he will have to learn/remember; even more terrifying: joe averages learns/remembers something.
step in big corp with made up names/numbers that portray no factual/useful information whatsoever.
joe average: so what is that processor thingy like?
intel: well, very simple to describe it actually; it's a p4 3.0ghz ...
joe average: *flinches
intel: 512 kilo... urhh.. umm it has hyperthreading technology.
joe average: ohh. makes perfect sense!!!
Xenoterranos - Sunday, October 16, 2005 - link
there were so many slashes/hyphens in that sentance/statement that I/me(s)he? got a little comfused/obfuscated.Hey, since my name is Joe, and I know exactly what I'm talking about, would that make me Joe Above Average? Or by extension, UltraJoe? That sounds cool, im changing my name to UltraJoe.
But seriously, I completely agree. I liked the days when you could go to the local PC shop and say "I want an Athlon 2.0ghz 512KB sktA and that was it! I hate the fact that there the 5XX line is better than the 6XX line up untill prc XX where the 6XX line is better...blah blah blah. ANYthing would be an improvement at this point.
Kalessian - Sunday, October 16, 2005 - link
rofl, I was thinking to same thing.We'll get used to it... or we won't and they'll change it agian.