Intel currently has 14 "different" products coming out - many of which will perform virtually identical.

Why doesn't intel/AMD go the Apple route with naming schemes? Just look at how much simpler the example below is.

  • S3 Ultra X: Ultra X7 385H/Ultra X9 368H/Ultra X9 388H
  • S3 Ultra: Ultra 7 356H/366H/386H (still don't care about the clock differences)
  • S3 Pro X: Ultra 5 338H
  • S3 Pro: Ultra 5 336H
  • S3 Plus: Ultra 5 325/335/355/365 (.4ghz wont matter for battery life options)
  • S3: Ultra 5 322/332 (two processors with different name, same specs wtf?)

Different name = different core count
Better GPU = Add an X on the end

Like I get it, Intel doesn't want to limit good binned chips to the poorly binned chips clock speed. But these are not desktops. People rarely reach their max clock speed in laptops due to thermal limits anyways - if people push them that far at all.

If intel is worried about their benchmarking performance, just UNLOCK THE CLOCK MULTIPLIER!!! People who care about clock speeds would bump it, people who don't would not.

  • While I agree their naming scheme is a mess, yours is far worse.

    parent

    Just because it sounds similar to Apple does not make it "bad".

    I chose "S3" because they literally market them as "Series 3" (sounds awfully similar to M-series 🤨). Could fiddle with it but my idea stands:

    Different core count = different name, Better gpu = add X

    parent root

  • TBH, as long as the Ultra 5 338H is actually called an Ultra X5, it'd make the entire thing a lot more consistent

    as in now X always means "the one with the good GPU"

    parent

    the 338H doesn't have "the" good GPU, it has a B370, with 10 cores

    parent root

    It still should have the X IMO. They're still bothering to call it a B3xx chip rather than just "Intel Graphics" like the <=4 Xe chips. The handheld chips running downclocked GPUs get the B360 and B380 names as well. Those should all be Core Ultra X.

    As of right now only the ending 8 differentiates the 338H from the small-GPU SKUs, which IMO is not clear enough. Also, if the X became the standard for all big-GPU chips, that ending digit can be used for something else, such as noting the actual GPU performance within the stack. Perhaps just using the 6-9 from B360-390 or something like that.

    parent root

  • You have no understanding of Intel's business and thus are not qualified to advise them what to do

    Intel doesn't sell these CPUs to the end consumer, they sell them to their customers - the PC manufacturers. And that is the reason why there is so much choice, because the PC manufacturers want it.

    Also, you clearly have never heard of vPro.

    parent

    Btw, OEMs love the fact that the Ultra 5 336H and 338H are vastly different products with hugely different performance when it comes to graphics. Why? Cause they can market the 338H to you, and then sell you the 336H at a fraction of the cost, and if you are not very tech-savvy, well, that's too bad for you.

    parent root

    [deleted]

    parent root

    It’s too hard to be a smart consumer and Google the names of the processor(s) and compare?

    parent root

    If you're a smart consumer you aren't buying windows laptops.

    parent root

    Ah I should instead buy Apple laptops and/or Arm laptops that don't work with my programs. Genius!

    parent root

    Yes because PC manufacturers want a "choice" to get a CPU with 100MHz higher clock speed as if that will make a difference in a mobile device at all.

    If you think "vPro" is so important, processors with it should have entirely unique names. You and many others in the comments made an effort to point this out more than intel's own naming scheme does.

    parent root

    You are placing way more importance into the naming than any normal customer would.

    The names that matter to normal customers are Core Ultra 5, Core Ultra 7, Core Ultra X7, which is what you will also find on the stickers that Intel has the PC manufacturers put on the device. The model numbers are just for the PC manufacturers and customers who want the exact SKU.

    Seriously, your obsession with this is weird. Just accept that the naming is not meant for you and move on. Not everything has to be like Apple.

    If you think "vPro" is so important, processors with it should have entirely unique names. You and many others in the comments made an effort to point this out more than intel's own naming scheme does.

    Yes, because vPro doesn't matter for normal consumers, but only for big enterprise customers.

    parent root

    "Obsession" as if multiple YouTubers, some with millions of subscribers, haven't said the exact same thing I did

    parent root

    Right, those guys are surely the ultimate authority on anything and not just engagement driven outrage machines /s

    parent root

    That's some serious credentials you're bringing up

    parent root

  • The SKU count is roughly doubled because you have each step with/without vPro - these get a 100MHz max turbo frequency bump, but the main benefit is you can run the corporate firmware with vPro support, so you get additional security and manageability features. Exception is the Ultra 9 where they just do it with vPro support as standard.

    These have a higher cost because you are getting more features.

    You could make it so you just have one CPU and then the manufacturer pays a license for corporate firmware per device, but that's more work to then ensure manufacturers are licensing machines correctly, and more confusing for end-users where now if you're buying a corporate device with vPro support you know you are looking at Core Ultra 236V and 268V for vPro support whilst 226V and 258V don't have it.

    parent

    I see, that does complicate things.

    parent root

  • Because intel’s customers work with thin margins and want the wide product stack with lots of performance and price steps. For them it matters if they get 4.4ghz for $300 or 4.6ghz for $350. You are not Intel’s customer unless you ordered a pallet of 1000 CPUs, which I doubt.

    parent

  • Apple really isn't better. They leave out lots of the important performance information. They just don't tell you at all.

    parent

  • I agree for those cpu that have no alphabet denomination at the back as that just looks like how desktop cpu is.

    But for X7 and X9 is just even easier CPU differentiation

    parent

  • At this point even S3, S3 Pro and S3 Pro Max would be a great improvement.

    parent

  • Totally don’t get it, miss the 13900k 14600k type names.

    parent

  • Brah I don't care about the naming conventions, it is what it is. It is petty to argue about all of this.

    I need the B770 and C880 to be released. I need more Intel Arc Pro cards to be released, there is no hope for humanity otherwise. I need Battlemage and Battlematrix everywhere but TSMC is the bottleneck.

    Hopefully there is more for 2026 where Intel IFS shines. God help us all!

    parent

  • Are you saying they are all locked???

    parent

  • I only care about the top level sku so the names don't matter.

    parent

  • I only agree with the title. Your naming scheme is much worse lol

    parent

  • Samaung Galaxy S3

    parent

  • Intel to $100 guaranteed

    parent
  • parent

  • Check the Just Josh interview! Dude criticizes exactly that to an intel executive... For me, they should drop the ultra naming scheme altogether... it hasn't stuck yet... they should go back to de i3/i5/i7/i9...use the X for the B390... and an S for the 16 core variants...

    parent

  • Apple always nails the small stuff

    parent