Intel just announced in his blog both as on their official website that besides the i5 Core processors will see under the eaves of i3 and the disappearance Core Core 2 Duo / Quad. The problem? confusion everywhere.
Personally I miss the time when Pentium prevailed. The consumer public know that a Pentium 4 was better than a Pentium 3 and the rest were little things like indicating the speed at which it works and holy remedy, but then came Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, Pentium Dual Core, Celeron and an amalgam of processors that are theoretically “better” than previous models but lack features like hardware virtualization. To clarify the confusion decided to simplify what they call “good, better, best” to prefixes Core i3, i5 and i7. The big dilemma is that repeated the same mistake that AMD to have different sockets for each platform, which will only annoy the USER.
450×250 core Core i3, i5 and i7: rename and chaos
CE Week Magazine prepared this interesting speculative table with the changes we see in this new naming structure. Lynnfield eg-Core processor i5-star to be available on this platform and Core i7, with the support Hyperthreading and the only difference. As is known by regular readers of Validating, Core i5 use the socket LGA 1156 is unlike that Core i7 uses 1366 and the LGA 775 socket that has accompanied so many years we will continue with us hosting the Core 2 Duo / Quad, Pentium and Celeron processors.
The measure aims to have a few processors in each of the segments, which added to the star system to give a ranking to their processors greatly simplify the system for users, but not for those with some knowledge and love to build their own PCs and do not trust the clutches of OEMs irresponsible. Along with the differentiation of “3 steps” for we still have Core Pentium and Celeron brands, so you could say that according to the brilliant marketing team would be good Intel Celeron, Pentium best, Core i3 the most-well, Core i5 as much-better Core i7 and the maximum-maximum, which is not very appealing to say.
A recurring suggestion in the airy responses against Intel was to simplify their models using other suffixes such as Core M xxx for medical applications, or Core A Hyperthreading architecture where it is very important to make renders faster. Core S to promote safe environments where Intel vPro technology for these markets and so on, or do what automakers are doing and add the year of the processor, so we might have a 2.66GHz Core i7 in Models 2008, 2009 and 2010, which would make the brand is much more friendly to the public and would urge undoubtedly much more to upgrade instead of inventing fancy names that bring to reality soon.
In this aspect could criticize AMD for doing something similar with their teams, since the new Phenom II used a similar scheme, but the big difference is that there is no need to change motherboard to go from one Phenom 550 to a x2 II II x4 Phenom 940, while Intel only we can do alternating between Lynnfiel Core i5 / 7 for socket LGA 1156. What happens when someone wants to upgrade its Core i7 with Lynnfield Clarksfield processors? Both are Core i7 and should work, right?
Finally there is the issue of popularity. Seeing how the public understood laughed at NVIDIA and its thousand refried half a billion from the G92 cards (8800GTS 512 -> 9800GTX -> 9800GTX + -> GTS 250) to key rings with defective cores, it is difficult not to think of renaming current processors to sort the chaos surrounding a bit does not generate a negative response from various sectors with arguments like “RENAMED CORE 2 DUO ONLY LOLOLOLOLOL! 1!! UNO”, which only give rise to various holy wars. We can only wait and see what appears to these platforms and see how they measure the height of the public or not.
