Intel Strips 'Gigahertz' from Computer Chip Names

Reuters | March 20, 2004 | Daniel Sorid

[HAL9000]

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Taking a page from automobile marketers, Intel Corp. will now assign model numbers to its chips and eliminate measurements of raw speed from its product names, the world's largest chip maker said on Friday.

The move marks a break from decades of chip marketing strategy, and comes at a time when Intel is trying to pack into its chips more features, such as security and multi-tasking, that fall outside what has long been the primary measurement of raw speed -- the number of megahertz or gigahertz.

The shift, one analyst said, will better position Intel's newest notebook computer chip, the Pentium M, which has lower "clock speeds" than other Intel mobile chips. But the new marketing strategy could also confuse computer shoppers used to treating chip speed as the only marker of performance.

"It is confusing, and it's going to take a tremendous amount of education on the part of Intel and Intel's customers for this to sort of get assimilated into the marketplace," said Nathan Brookwood, who runs the research firm Insight 64.

Intel's new model numbers give each Intel processor brand a series number. Within desktop computer chips, for instance, the low-end Celeron chip will be given the 300 series, the high-end Pentium 4 will be given the 500 series label, and its Pentium 4 Extreme Edition will be given the 700 series.

Within each series, a higher number -- a 350 series versus a 330 series, for example -- will signify a broader array of features in the chip.

While chip speed will no longer be included in the chip's name, Intel is not eliminating chip speed from the description, and said personal computer makers are unlikely to strike speed from their own advertising.

Intel rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. got rid of clock speed from its chip names two-and-a-half years ago, replacing it with another number that it said better signified the chip's overall performance.

At the time, it was widely viewed as a way for AMD to address the issue of its chips running at slower speeds than rival Intel's.

An AMD marketing executive suggested Intel's model numbers were arbitrary figures that said nothing about the chip's underlying performance.

"We have a system that we go by: it's not arbitrary," said Patrick Moorhead, AMD's vice president of corporate marketing. "We don't try to hide what we're doing."

Copyright Reuters 2004. All Rights Reserved.

[GeronL]

The shift, one analyst said, will better position Intel's newest notebook computer chip, the Pentium M, which has lower "clock speeds" than other Intel mobile chips. But the new marketing strategy could also confuse computer shoppers used to treating chip speed as the only marker of performance

If people want gigahertz and you do not deliver what the market wants... how does that put you in a better market position??

Is this reporter an economic retard?

The company is probably going to go after the small business market offering security features that are more important to them than raw speed.

[longtermmemmory]

oooooh intel markets NEWcoke.

So they put so much neutering elements onto the chip that it went slower.

Perhaps they will roll out the intel chip classic 8088

[Psycho_Bunny]

Intel is trying to pack into its chips more features, such as security

lol

[Political Junkie Too]

Do they mean security, as in back-doors that allow the government to peek into your computer? Remember the buzz that started with the unique CPU ids that couldn't be disabled, and the patch that Intel had to put out?

-PJ

[July 4th]

Intel rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. got rid of clock speed from its chip names two-and-a-half years ago, replacing it with another number that it said better signified the chip's overall performance.

Well, yeah, but it didn't strip the measurement of speed from the chip's name altogether. All AMD did was name their chips so they could be easily compared to Intel's speeds.

All this does is make buying a processor one step more difficult for the buyer.

[Paradox]

Megahertz has long been overrated as a performance measure. Its like rating a cars speed based on the engines RPM. Bottom line is that people are going to have to get smart, and look up the latest benchmarks for various CPU's.

I recently tried out a "slow" Pentium M CPU'd laptop, at only 1.3 megahertz, that thing was much faster than a 2.0 Celeron. Ditto the AMD chips vs Celeron and Pentium. Then you have the Power PC chip, multiple CPU'd machines, and that is a whole nudder ball of wax..

[GeronL]

slower chips, how innovative.

The market will probably shrug. AMD will be celebrating.

[Boundless]

> Taking a page from automobile marketers, ...

Taking a page from AMD.
Intel has also announced it with follow AMD's lead in
putting the RAM controller in the CPU soon, eliminating
most what is know as the "north bridge" chip.

> ... Intel Corp. will now assign model numbers to its
> chips and eliminate measurements of raw speed from
> its product names, ...

Intel is abandoning the clock speed race, because they
can't keep it up (and they aren't getting proportional
benefit from what boosts they've lately applied). And
their power & thermals are out of control, but that's
another matter.

A 3 GHz Pentium performs about the same as a 2GHz AMD,
or a 1 GHz Intel Itanium. Clock speed hasn't meant much
per se for the last few years, but because Intel's was
higher, they used it as a marketing tool for gullible
customers.

> The shift, one analyst said, will better position
> Intel's newest notebook computer chip, the Pentium M, ...

Cover story. Intel has another problem too, which is the
upcoming IA-32e (AMD64) instructions being added to some
processors. They have to manage the performance story
VERY carefully if they expect to sell any Itaniums at all.

Concealing real performance is part of the shell game.

> But the new marketing strategy could also confuse
> computer shoppers used to treating chip speed as the
> only marker of performance.

Gasp. Consumers are going to have to check benchmark
results, or ask their local geek. They may get some
advice that will buy them a faster PC at a lower price
(and if it's AMD, have a 64-bit future built-in at no
extra cost).

> Intel rival Advanced Micro Devices Inc. got rid of
> clock speed from its chip names two-and-a-half years
> ago, replacing it with another number that it said
> better signified the chip's overall performance.

Actually, AMD has gone to Intel-style number for the
Opteron 64-bit processor, and it's this model that
Intel is following.

> At the time, it was widely viewed as a way for AMD to
> address the issue of its chips running at slower speeds
> than rival Intel's.

Bias of the reporter is revealed here. Notice that he
said "slower speeds" and not "slower clock speeds".
AMD processors can outperform Intel, despite the
clock disparity.

> Copyright Reuters 2004.

Oh, that explains it.

[Auntie Dem]

Perhaps they will roll out the intel chip classic 8088

Yeah, but you should see that baby run overclocked at 12V and 133 mhz!

[RightOnline]

Sorry. Wrong. To gauge a processor's performance strictly based upon its clock speed is ridiculous. Example: Opterons may have lower clock speeds than "comparable" Intel processors.........but they have a superior architecture (memory management on the chip; hypertransport, etc.) that allows them to run circles around Intel processors that have higher clocks.

To suggest that the reporter is an "economic moron" (especially since he was merely quoting someone) is silly. Intel is finally doing what AMD did a couple years ago: come up with a better way of differentiating their processors.

[GeronL]

The reporter basically wrote that people were looking for the speed and that Intel would abandon that, and it would be a good thing.

GM abandons trucks with engines, even though people want engines it may be a boost to their market share.

I wasn't talking about the performance of the chips, I was talking about giving the market what it wants against giving them what they don't want. Product aside.

[greasepaint]

Keep in mind that when Intel and Microsoft
say the word 'security', its for their security,
not for the user.

[prophetic]

also Intel copied another page out of AMD's book this week when Intel announced that they WILL be putting the memory controller on the CPU (like the Opteron and the AMD 64 chips)!

So just WHO is the innovator and just who is copying who again?

[longtermmemmory]

Here is the problem. As a consumer, there needs to be a definitive measure which is applied by ALL makers. I want to be able to compare with some meaningful measure.

If Intel uses one standard and AMD another, comparison is intentionally impossible. (not unlike other industries where comparison shopping is made next to impossible by playing games.)

New Coke jokes aside. Superior archetecture means nothing. Might as well say this chip has more flux capacitors. If the chip is faster then the chip is faster, it can be measured and stated.

Same as any other speed based product.

[dennisw]

[hunter112]

Yeah, but you should see that baby run overclocked at 12V and 133 mhz!

Should I get eggs, sausage, and a frying pan nearby??!!

Seriously, is anybody having trouble with underperforming proccessors these days? Excepting, of course, Decelerons? The ability of the hardware has far outstripped the ability of the software, in my opinion. The processor is hardly the bottleneck in any system that was built and sold within the last year and a half, in my opinion.

[SuziQ]

Bump for later reading.

[Wilhelm Tell]

Yeah, but you should see that baby run overclocked at 12V and 133 mhz!

That reminds me of the "Turbo" button during the days of the 286 and before. They would take a 10 or 20 mhz processor and normally have it run at, say, 5mhz. Not all programs could work at the faster clock speed and the suitcase-sized "portable" computers would really run down the batteries at the faster clock speed.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Well you just need more software, MS is working on that.