I guess Intel can't seem to grasp that,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Submitted by ghot on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 1:33pm

....plain old numbers are easier??  I mean honestly, everyone only REALLY cares about the number of cores and the speed of said cores.  Why not do something....I don't know.....intelligent  like:

4x3.2Ghz   or   2x3.2Ghz and if they are unlocked   add a U.  Just let ME know when they make an 8x4.0GhzU   CPU and I'll be onboard.  Pictures are for marketing depts.,  numbers should be for consumers.

You hearing this AMD?

 

Take an OS, and edit out all the efficiency, and what you have left is a post-XP Microsoft operating system :)

Login or register to post comments

shinier badges will make me

Submitted by bingojubes on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 9:48am

shinier badges will make me more likely to pay more attention to them.

 

i hope then that the processor case sticker is shiny, as well.

Login or register to post comments

Nunc est bibendum!   I'll

Submitted by Asterixx on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 9:44am

Nunc est bibendum!

 

I'll admit it,  I've gotten way behind in processors, chipsets, etc. I used to build my own systems but now I wouldn't even know what socket a Core2 Duo fits in, much less the actual specs and requirements of the chip. Used to be that when building a system you'd try to "future proof" it, but now it's not even worth the bother - it's cheaper to replace a whole computer than it is to upgrade it bit by bit. The fact that Intel and AMD seem to change sockets, chipsets, memory types, etc, like most change their underwear doesn't help.

For this reason I miss the old way of branding chips. With the Pentium brand name you knew that a P2 was better than a P1, and a P3 was better than a P2. You could also be fairly comfortable knowing that a 3 GHz P4 was better than a 2.4 GHZ P4. And you always knew that Celerons sucked. One thing remained constant, though: The newer chips were generally better than the older chips, and there were only two consumer-level brands on sale at a time (Pentium 4 and Celeron, for example). If you bought a P3 after the P4 debuted you were buying old stock.

 Now there are just too many brands. Atom, Celeron, Pentium, Centrino, Core, Core2, Core2 Duo, Core2 Quad, Core2 Extreme, Core I7, Core I7 Extreme, etc (and I don't think my list here even covers all of the stickers above, couldn't be bothered scrolling up and looking).And that's just Intel, I have no idea what AMD even sells anymore. It's just too damned confusing to bother keeping up with. 

My long-winded point: New stickers and star ratings are not going to make it any easier...

Login or register to post comments

Lot of badges...

Submitted by BaggerX on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 9:32am

What's the difference between the black Core i7 and the blue Core i7?  Does the color mean something?

Login or register to post comments

The die shot ruins them. 

Submitted by JuiceJones on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 9:00am

The die shot ruins them.  They would look much sleeker if that whole corner was just removed. 

Login or register to post comments

Stars will be within technology

Submitted by bear on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 8:55am

I suspect that the stars will be within the same category or tech, i.e., Intel Core i7 Extreme will have 1-5 stars, Intel Core i7 will have 1-5 stars, Intel Core 2 Extreme will have 1-5 stars, etc. It just doesn't make sense to compare a 5 star Core i7 extreme with a 5 star Pentium. I expect that they'll assume that consumers assume that newer tech is better; but, I agree that a 5 star rating islimited.

 

 

===================================

then (adverb) \'then\: denotes time

than (conjuction) \'than\: denotes comparison

Login or register to post comments

Neato

Submitted by M2012 on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 8:45am

 

I liked the old badge design, the more simple it is the better.  Just looking at all the Intel badges make me long to see the good old "Pentium II Inside" again.

Login or register to post comments

so is Atom half a star?

Submitted by nekollx on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 8:27am

so is Atom half a star?

Login or register to post comments

Stars flawed?

Submitted by Xerloq on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 8:24am

So how do they plan on dealing with relative performance over generations? Say I buy a 4-star chip today, and am looking at a 4 star chip next year. How is the customer supposed to distinguish between the two?

Login or register to post comments

Long overdue indeed.  With

Submitted by dag1992 on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 8:07am

Long overdue indeed.  With all the centrinos and cores out there, its getting more difficult to distinguish the better proc when it comes to laptops.  As for desktops, the numbers don't lie, but the star system is great for those who aren't as computer literate 

Login or register to post comments

Long Overdue

Submitted by thebauer on Tue, 04/07/2009 - 7:50am

I would say the star rating is long overdue.   Most consumers I would think have no idea of all the hidden numbers behind the processors.  Frequencies, L2 cache, transistors, and more, I think a 4 star system is a bit limited though, kind of like Vista's high score of 5.9

Login or register to post comments