News Intel's New Core Ultra Branding Drops the i, Looks Like AMD's Ryzen

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
I think Intel is opting the ULTRA naming scheme to deal with the overlap of a significantly newer architecture with an older gen architecture already being in the market.

So when Intel's Core Ultra branding takes effect, users will be able to tell "Meteor Lake/refresh" based SKUs apart from those based on "Raptor Lake," but looking for the Ultra brand. This might also help to transition the market between processor arch generations, and also to improve the inventory digestion, IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ikjadoon, atomicWAR and cyrusfox
BTW, Intel has also announced new badge designs for Intel EVO, and the vPro brand that the company uses for its commercial desktop and notebook processors
 
Good to see the Celeron & Pentium names bite the dust. They were holdovers from a bygone era that make no sense in the numeric scheme.

>The perception that Intel is diluting the hard-fought brand recognition built during those years is obviously going to be questioned

I don't see any adverse impact from the name change. It is simple and intuitive enough to glean at first glance. It's not like there's a plethora of players in the market that CPU branding would make a product standout from the rest. There are only two players in the x86 market, Intel and AMD.

>Intel didn’t confirm that only Meteor Lake chips would only be marked as Core Ultra but did say that tier ‘represents the latest innovations’

It would be problematic if only MTL CPUs get the 'Ultra' designation, as MTL will only be the "latest innovation" for one year, and you can't retroactively change the parts' name when "latest" becomes "standard" and there's a new latest.

It would also cause confusion if unlocked 'K' parts forms its own distinct tier, as then there'll be 4 tiers to consider.

Per above, I think 'Ultra' will simply denote premium (ie K) parts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vongole, ikjadoon and Jagar123
tennis2 said:
I'm not sure why this article is focused so much on "Intel copied AMD" when we (I?) still don't fully understand what the difference between Core and Core Ultra is. Surely that's the bigger issue here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, seems pretty hilarious when you have AMD cribbing the entire [processor brand] [3/5/7/9] lineup nomenclature, but when intel remove the letter "i" from their own branding they must be doing to to copy AMD! Especially with the whole song-and-dance Toms makes over why they ignore the 'processor' bit of the official branding (giving it a whole three paragraphs!) whist pretending anyone - including Intel themselves, such as on Ark - actually puts the 'XXth gen' bit of the branding in too.

In short:
Old: Core i7-13700K
New: Core 7 13700K

The 'Ultra' does not seem placed to be a core generation differentiator, but instead to differentiate a (for example) regular Core 7 from the top-of-the-range Core 7 with all GPU segments on the die enabled, or a higher TDP, or unlocked clocks, or all of the above. Think akin to the 'K' suffix familiar to the desktop line, but pushed into the up-front branding sticker.[/url]
 
  • Like
Reactions: vongole, atomicWAR, cyrusfox and 1 other person
tennis2 said:
What's faster, an Intel Core 7 or an Intel Core Ultra 5?
Click to expand...
What can you throw farther, an apple or an orange?
These will be different categories so this question will not be very relevant to most people.
If you need the ultra, for whatever reason, then it doesn't matter if the plain one is faster...
If you just need the faster one then it doesn't matter if it's ultra or not...
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR
TerryLaze said:
What can you throw farther, an apple or an orange?
These will be different categories so this question will not be very relevant to most people.
If you need the ultra, for whatever reason, then it doesn't matter if the plain one is faster...
If you just need the faster one then it doesn't matter if it's ultra or not...
Click to expand...
But most people are walking into their local big box store to buy their PC and don't know what's faster unless it has a bigger SKU number. So I'd say my question is absolutely relevant. This is a very clear overlap
 
  • Like
Reactions: ikjadoon, purple_dragon, bit_user and 3 others
tennis2 said:
But most people are walking into their local big box store to buy their PC and don't know what's faster unless it has a bigger SKU number. So I'd say my question is absolutely relevant. This is a very clear overlap
Click to expand...
So your fear is that a random person that will do zero research beforehand will maybe end up with a weaker CPU?
If someone does zero research then they probably won't mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR
Is that really such a big deal?? Were people confused because each CPU had an "i" in front of it??

And furthermore..."Ultra", really?? What's the next iteration..."Super Ultra"??

I swear, the IT and technology folks (hey, I am one of them,....) have the WORST imagination and creativity when it comes to names.

The one that takes the cake? Slapping a "Pro" at a new product...because, you know, the previous one was not "PROfessional" or for professionals....but this one is!!

What's next? Intel Core Super Ultra Pro 10 14900K!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 2838871
TerryLaze said:
So your fear is that a random person that will do zero research beforehand will maybe end up with a weaker CPU?
If someone does zero research then they probably won't mind.
Click to expand...

I'd say that over 90% of the consumers who buy Dell, HP, Lenovo et al have NO idea or couldn't care less or can't even decipher the difference!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: purple_dragon
Most people don't even buy desktop PC, they have a laptop. And they have no idea what kind of hardware is in there.

It's no different from a car. 99% of people driving a car have no idea what type of engine is in there. And why should they, unless you're a mechanic, there's no point in knowing.
 
Core Ultra 7 is objectively worse than Core i7, because the naming is longer/slower to say, without adding any significant information.

So I guess I don't see how replacing a single letter with 5 letters and an extra syllable across 3 new sub-brands is supposed to simplify the brand naming in any way.

This additionally does exactly nothing to address the2 biggest problems with Intel's branding:
  1. The numbers in the brand names are actively wrong (ie a Core 7 will never have 7 cores, ever).
  2. The part numbers (14700k) are longer than they need to be, don't describe the part well enough, and are especially messy for laptop parts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: adamboy64, bit_user and (deleted member)
PEnns said:
Is that really such a big deal?? Were people confused because each CPU had an "i" in front of it??

And furthermore..."Ultra", really?? What's the next iteration..."Super Ultra"??

I swear, the IT and technology folks (hey, I am one of them,....) have the WORST imagination and creativity when it comes to names.

The one that takes the cake? Slapping a "Pro" at a new product...because, you know, the previous one was not "PROfessional" or for professionals....but this one is!!

What's next? Intel Core Super Ultra Pro 10 14900K!
Click to expand...
Put super at the end like Nvidia. It makes more sense:
Intel Core Ultra 9 Pro 14900K Super (which is pretty much what the "S" in the "KS" series stood for anyway)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bit_user and PEnns
Giroro said:
Core Ultra 7 is objectively worse than Core i7, because the naming is longer/slower to say, without adding any significant information.

So I guess I don't see how replacing a single letter with 5 letters and an extra syllable across 3 new sub-brands is supposed to simplify the brand naming in any way.
Click to expand...
So you don't think that within 2 hour of release everybody will already be calling them u5 u7 and so on?!
Giroro said:
  1. The numbers in the brand names are actively wrong (ie a Core 7 will never have 7 cores, ever).
  2. The part numbers (14700k) are longer than they need to be, don't describe the part well enough, and are especially messy for laptop parts.
Click to expand...
The numbers don't show physical attributes but generation, tier of performance, and existence of iGPU and or overclocking.
14=generation
700= better than 600 better than 500 better than 400 and so on
K=overclockable
F=no iGPU
It's extremely clear and as short as possible.
10 generations later someone that wants to upgrade can still figure out where on the performance scale a potential new CPU will land.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR and cyrusfox
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom