Intel's 'Nehalem' Now Officially Core i7

[Guest]

Insider info I heard for the "i7" naming. According to the marketing folks at Intel, the "i" stands for Intel. In my opinion, they could have come up with something more creative since the "i" is somewhat overused throughout the technology world. As for the number, this is a new numbering system for Nehalem-based products, where "7" is somewhere in the middle. This is something like the Mazda6, 3, 5, 2 car series. Expect lower and higher numbers to come out in the future for the Nehalem family.

 

[zenmaster]

Pentium (1)
Pentium II (2)
Pentium III (3)
Pentium IV (4)
Pentium D (5)
CoreDuo (6)
Nehalem (7)

Hence The 7.

And the "I"?
Well they probably wanted to keep it short for ease and if they were going ot pick one letter, the "I" is good for non-techies.

 

[randomizer]

I'm not so much bothered by the 'i', I'm more annoyed that they've added an extra syllable to the name, and it's only one letter. "Core i7 Extreme" just doesn't roll off the tongue as well as
Core 2 Extreme".

 

[Guest]

I have no complaints about the name, and find it less technical sounding then
'core 2 duo' (which I found idiotic sounding).
Granted, I would have preferred a name like i4400, or xxx4,5 or so....
If i7 is referring to a 7Ghz processor, I have no complaints about the name.

On the other hand, if the newer cores are more power efficient then the core2duo, any indication in Ghz might be deceiving. (look at the atom processor running at 1,6Ghz globally being on par with a 900Mhz celeron).

I'm not interested in multicores neither, as this is mostly good for powerhungry applications.
Currently I'm running XP on a 1,2Ghz singlecore computer for basic tasks, which is enough speed and performance for maybe 75% of the rest of the world.

I hope to see this newer processor is indeed less powerhungry then a core2duo, and not 'relative less powerhungry', like Windows Vista supposed to be a better and 'faster' os, but in most cases still don't beat xp!

 

[hellwig]

i7? Whatever. Core was a stupid name to begin with. i7 is just going to be more meaningless. There will be Intel Core i7 3423's. Of course each digit in 3423 means something different, and each meaning is different between mobile and desktop processors. Mobile's will come with the same numbering and naming scheme, but will still be based on on the Core 2 architecture for the time being. Pentium will still be the new name for entry-level processors (formerly Celerons), but Atom processors will now be renamed Core 2-LPA (light-power architecture). In the end, nothing will be simpler, and you'll still need a textbook to determine what your processor is capable of.

 

[Guest]

Jumas98 has it right. They announced today in an internal Intel publication.

 

[mr roboto]

Intel and Nvidia's marketing teams are just stupid. It's another moronic naming scheme that will only stand to confuse customers even more. But the important thing is that the team's who thought it up aren't confused by it. So basically if they get it you should get it. Unfortunately it really doesn't matter what I think, but if it did I'd fire all their asses!

 

[highphilosopher]

[citation][nom]gravemind123[/nom]Here is my guess at the naming:1. Pre 32-bit CPUs2. i3863. i4864. Pentium(P5)5. Pentium 4/Netburst6. Intel P6(Pentium II, III, Core, Core2)7. Intel i7At least that is my guess as to why they named it as such, it is the 7th major core design they have released.(lumping pre 32-bit together as one thing and ignoring all non x86 releases, Itanium/i860/i432/etc...)[/citation]

This makes about as much sense as...
"I couldn't wednesday on feeling because herring my red was ford."

 

[reichscythe]

C'mon people, do a little reading! It's called i7 'cause it's a processor capable of 8 simultaneous processing threads but one thread on every chip shipped is disabled (8-1=7) to allow Intel to make fiscal lemonade out of the "lemons" of this processor generation...

 

[nukemaster]

C'mon people, do a little reading! It's called i7 'cause it's a processor capable of 8 simultaneous processing threads but one thread on every chip shipped is disabled (8-1=7) to allow Intel to make fiscal lemonade out of the "lemons" of this processor generation...

its not PS3

 

[crimsonking]

I'm sorry, but who is editing these articles? Example below:

"But we have no idea if that will be the general impression of the market and if it was Intel’s intention to come up a cold and very technical name"

This is just one of MANY editing mistakes I have caught in many articles here over time. This is just one reason why people worry over the validity of this site, since it changed.

 

[apache_lives]

i initialy thought the 7 might have been like 7th generation, perhaps 786 but it doesnt exactly line up atm... hmmmm

its going to be tough lining up series when there are so many differences - core count, hyperthreading, cache count, CSI enabled, integrated graphics, mobile variants, sockets etc...

ROFLMAO 7th generation done right, a proper sucessor done right unline a pentium 4 - the first true architectural change since the pentium pro?

ProDigit80 it wont be less power hungry then the current series - it will offer more performance in the same/similar thermal and power limits, and that 1.2ghz isn't sufficient for anything these days - people surf the web, listen to music, watch movies, and with vista and that heavy antivirus, chat program etc chewing resources you need more power, and Vista IS FASTER then xp - its designed to take advantage of modern hardware, not crappy 1.2ghz cpus with lame 512mb ram - thats so 2000, thats like me telling you your 1.2ghz isnt needed when i have windows 3.11, and 32mb of ram, and a 486-dx2 - it is indeed lighter and faster then your XP machine, and an absolute pile of rubbish.

When you try a machie with a quad core, 4+gb ram etc with Vista64 you will NEVER go back, and after around a month of use XP starts to feel obsolete, and its all mainstream and cheap these days.

Kudos to nehalem, multi-threading and 64 bit os's.

 

[JohnnyMash]

i7. Wow, can't wait for a k8, p5, or x2...all the way to a z80. I claim now that we just call it 'Core 3 + model no.' and override Intel by mass consensus.

 

[reichscythe]

@nukemaster - heh heh...I'm glad at least one person in here caught the joke...

@JohnnyMash (and others suggesting core 3) - If the Core architecture is 32-bit and Core 2 is 64... Core 3 would imply a 128-bit processor, right? But Nehalem still has a 64 bit architecture... so really we should all just call it Core 2+HT8! or, more simply, Core 2.00125!!

Honestly, they (Intel) or we (by the previously suggested mass consensus override) should have just called the entire line Core N, since pretty much everyone in geekdom is more than familiar with the "Nehalem" codename at this point...

 

[r352alit]

Bahh... name doesn't matter. I don't give a $h*7 about naming. Will it be i7, intel7, intel nehalem7 or core 2 HT, who care? As long as it good, great performance and affordable price... i will pick it up for my brain system. I'm waiting until the full review on this 'next thing future proof processor' tom's.

 

[GlItCh017]

I think we can all agree that if you're reading this article you know what Core2Duo (C2D) Core2Quad (C2Q) etc. etc. means. But the general public going from that to i7, will be lost.

I agree with the article in that sense, that Intel is creating an unnecessary learning curve. Good post, and interesting. Maybe they are switching it to provide a better numbering format for future processors? i8/i9 down the road? Will be interesting to see what they do with the new naming.

 

[exiled scotsman]

i7 isn't that bad if the 7 indicates general performance on a scale.

i2 - ULV
i3 - ULV Performance
i4 - Low end
i5 - Low end Performance
i6 - mid-range
i7 - mid-range performance
i8 - high-end
i9 - high-end performance
Then extreme parts...

I don't know, just a thought.

As for the 'i'. I don't seemed to be bothered as much by it since it isn't tacked onto a word (i.e. iCore) It doesn't matter anyway. Everybody is going to buy them. Everyone will be amazed with performance/watt, until 32nm i7 or AMD one-ups them. IMO, Core was a brilliant name. Highly successful.

BTW, Intel is fast approaching the 11nm barrier to silicon technology.

 

[bounty]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR the thing is... it's not call the "Core I7" much as there was a "P4".... no, they have to use a fracking lower case "i" ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! m32han 3wks687hjk n WHY GOD WHY! *@WBN82~!~!!~~

 

[Guest]

intel used to label their chips with an "i" and some numbers, such as i8259, i8085, i8255, since the 80's I guess, so it's their right to use the i
anyway, it seems to be a great choice for a Christmas upgrade.

 

[DXRick]

Well, in my no where near humble enough opinion, this is what happens when you let engineer geeks (like me) come up with a product name! Don't they have marketing types working there?? Since Nehalem is a new generation, reusing the word core is WRONG, and we are left guessing at what i7 means.

 

[Guest]

You guys are all going in the wrong direction. The "7" is the performance number relative to the other processors in the family. Next year we'll see the lower end 4 and the mainstream 5 or something. The Nehalem shrink might be the 8 and 9's. Who knows. It is pretty entertaining seeing all the different ways you guys are counting to 7 though.

As for the "i", that's a mystery. I think they're trying to give it an identifier like the Audi A3, S4, R8, etc (I'm not a car guy, I have no idea what those mean).

 

[BowRiver]

[citation][nom]DXRick[/nom]Well, in my no where near humble enough opinion, this is what happens when you let engineer geeks (like me) come up with a product name! Don't they have marketing types working there?? Since Nehalem is a new generation, reusing the word core is WRONG, and we are left guessing at what i7 means. [/citation]

Well, if after the Pentium they had named the Core architecture Hexium then Nehalem would be the "Septium" or 7th generation of really, really bad marketing code names.

Really, Intel's engineers have always had cool development code-names eg: Dothan, Yonah, Merom. Then the marketing dweebs take over and we get insipid stuff like Pentium M, Core, Core2

 

[Fadamor]

Sheesh! A whole lot of BS-ing over what Intel chooses to call their chip. "i7" is no worse than "Nehalem" in regards to knowing what you're talking about. And does anybody REALLY need to add the "Core" in front of the "i7"? Everything from Intel from now on will be Core based, so let's drop it now just like we dropped finishing the name with "microprocessor" when discussing it.

Here's a test. Guess what the following names represent:
"i7", "i7 Dual", "i7 Quad", "i7 Oct", "i7 Hex".

Anybody see the need to throw a "Core" in front of those to make them clearer?

 

[SpinachEater]

Great the new iQuad. Welcome to the iWorld.

 

[Guest]

To people complaining about the i7 name "since the Apple iPod" - Intel has been naming chips in this manner for decades. i686? i586? Hello?

This isn't anything new for Intel. They've almost always based their processor chips off of i###.