Intel is updating its Atom processor branding to better communicate the expected performance and experience customers can expect from their Intel powered mobile device. In fact, the new branding specifies three tiers. Atom processors will soon come in Atom x3, x5, and x7 flavors. This branding scheme is similar to the Core processor branding using the i3, i5, and i7 labels.
The Atom x3, x5, and x7 chips are low power, efficient processors for battery powered devices and sit below the Core M series which in turn are below the Core i3, i5, and i7 processors. The following infographic shows off the new branding though Intel does not reveal any specific details about these new Atom chips (we will hopefully know more after Mobile World Congress). Of course, Atom x3 chips will reside in smartphones with x5 and x7 chips powering tablets and budget convertibles. The x7 brand represents the flagship processors of the Atom line.
The new branding will begin with the next generation of Atom chips which should include Cherry Trail, the 14nm successor to Bay Trail featuring four x86 Airmont cores and Gen 8 Intel graphics. Cherry Trail (Cherryview SoC) will be used in all manner of mobile devices from entry level 8"+ tablets to larger notebooks and convertibles. It appears that Intel will use Moorefield (a quad core 14nm refresh of Merrifield) through 2015 for smartphones though road maps seem to indicate that Intel's budget SoFIA SoC will also launch this year. SoFIA and Moorefield processors should fall under the Atom x3 brand with the higher powered and higher clocked Cherry Trail chips will use the Atom x5 and x7 monikers.
What are your thoughts on Intel's new Atom x3/x5/x7 brands?
What about celeron and
What about celeron and pentium?
Heh, you know they did not
Heh, you know they did not say but from the info graphic it appears so…unless they are reserving it for specific skus just to confuse people! My guess is that the new branding will take its place.
So with this do they kill
So with this do they kill celeron and pentium? otherwise we have :
and that shit is pretty much insane
I hate it when they overlap
I hate it when they overlap too, like when you have a low i5 that under-performs the high i3, because WE love explaining this shit to friends and family, “I don’t understand, how could it be better if it’s a lower number, that just doesnt make sense!” thanks intel.
The worst offense in recent
The worst offense in recent history was IMHO putting out both Haswell and Silvermont parts under the Celeron and Pentium brands for desktops and mobile.
“Gs are OK, but please stay away from Js and Ns!” usually goes over great with family and friends.
This will absolutely not add
This will absolutely not add any confusion. None at all.
Meh, this is no different
Meh, this is no different than it is now. The only “new” SKUs are Core M, which are really just the ULV i3/5/7 SKUs.
Well intel is doing stuff it
Well intel is doing stuff it doesnt need to for no reason it seems, BUT they are the big dog trying to stay big dog so I guess they gota do something.
In laptops all we need is Atom, Core M and Core i7, in phones and tablets consumers don’t care about processor branding, and I’m starting to wonder if Intel remembers that desktops are still a thing.
Trying to rebrand, and
Trying to rebrand, and obfuscate, Oh how closely the x3, may be to the i3 branding, and that company controlled by marketing monkeys reveals its pathology, Intel is not in the technology business, it is in the technology milking business. This is just a shell game/three card monte game of rebranding, Intel’s marketing so hopes that the less sophisticated out there confuses the x, with the i, and makes the A-TOM mistake. Intel is in definite need of more competition, and that high margin price structure will have come down, the contra revenue losses can not continue. The laurels are crushed flat, and are completely desiccated, Intel, How’s that mobile market working out so far.
I think this will be a bit of
I think this will be a bit of an improvement on the current branding. Just look at the Wiki list http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Atom_microprocessors and try and tell me which order of performance they go in . . . Will there be a feature set the defines an x3 from an x5 or x5 from x7? i.e. in the i3/i5/i7 series there are (mostly) rules that i3 is dual core hyperthreaded no turbo, i5 is quad core no hyperthreading and turbo, and i7 is quad core hyperthreaded and turbo.
Processor branding is
Processor branding is confusing anyway. i3, i5, and i7 on the desktop have pretty distinct meanings, but Intel screwed that up on mobile. For the low-power mobile chips, the entire i-series are 2C/4T. But not all laptop chips. Some laptop i7’s are actually 4C/8T.
Why have a “series” at all if you don’t have consistency?
– My laptop is a little slow
– My laptop is a little slow but it does have an intel 7 processor in it. Why?
– How much did you paid?
– There is no way you pay $250 for an i7. What does your windows say about the processor model?
– Atom x7.
does anyone know how well the
does anyone know how well the x7 is likely to compare in comparison to the core i3, or the core-m i3?
I am currently using the z3795 with the Lenovo thinkpad 8, and it sometimes outperforms my admittedly 2 year old Samsung 700T Core i5.
flawed question. Core-i3 is a
flawed question. Core-i3 is a name atached to various generations of CPUs, there is no Core-m-i anything, it’s just Core-M
But I think I understand what you were asking.
The modern (current and coming up) top end ATOM parts are very close, a little up a little down, to the mobile Core-i3 parts, both in power use and performance, HOWEVER, for whatever the reason, it seems to be very hard to find a ATOM laptop with more than 2gb of ram and next to impossible to find one with more than 4.
Basically the only good answer is: There is no simple answer. It’s chip vs chip / use case vs. use case.
THIS is why we need bench-markers, to give us actual numbers instead of names.
Yeah, in theory it would go:
Yeah, in theory it would go: Atom x7 < Intel Core M < Intel Core i3 but there is naturally going to be overlap in systems, battery life, and performance. You do bring up a good point though when comparing these systems, moving to a Core M or Core i3 would get you better features and better performance in other areas versus Atom even if the top end atom ends up winning in certain benchmarks. Having more RAM by going with a dual core i3 system would help with general system responsiveness even if you don't have the fastest CPU for X application for example.
The big thing I see these
The big thing I see these days is the walls of browser tabs people leave open, and it can be super suprising just how much ram a browser uses these days.