• PlantObserver@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Ultra 7 155H with six P-cores, eight E-cores, and eight graphics cores; or an Ultra 7 165H with the same number of cores but marginally higher clock speeds.

    WTF is Intel smoking with these naming schemes I can’t even understand what this means. Thank fuck AMD is an option.

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 months ago

      The number behind Ultra is pretty much the same as with the i$x scheme. 3 is entry, 5 is mid range, 7 is high end, 9 is bad decision making.

      The number after that kind of works like before. So higher number means more better. Probably with an extension for coming generation. Remember, the first i5s had 4 digit names as well, the fourth digit was prepended to indicate generations.

      Thing is, there’s no really good naming scheme, because there are so many possible variants/dimensions. Base clock, turbo clock, TDP, P core count, E core count, PCIe lanes, socket, generation ,… How would you encode that in a readable name?

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        2 months ago

        They have high power and low power cores. Borrowed the idea from “BIG.little” design from ARM.

    • tabular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can’t even understand what this means

      I think that’s the intent, and they fucking nailed it.

    • barryamelton@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      It’s the intent, like “high-end” car models, so you can’t distinguish them by features or age.