3 ms·

I agree. I think a deeper problem is it takes a Ph.D in Intel / AMD branding to understand what to buy. An 80486 was faster than an 80386, and 33MHz was slower

by blagie 4y ago

I agree. I think a deeper problem is it takes a Ph.D in Intel / AMD branding to understand what to buy. An 80486 was faster than an 80386, and 33MHz was slower than 66MHz. It was simple. Intel's i7 line-up goes from 2 to 16 cores, 1-4GHz, spanning 13 generations. Toss in i3/i5/i7/i9, and lines like Atom and Xeon. Each time I need to upgrade my computer, I groan. It's not just less fun, it's positively miserable. Most people I know either buy the cheapest possible computer, or an Apple. I don't know why Intel thinks anyone will spend extra if they have no idea what they're buying. Most non-Apple users I know have phones with faster processor, higher-resolution displays, and for higher prices than their laptops.

tracker1 4y ago
The 13 generations is particularly bad, if you're just trying to comment to someone looking for a used system, when half the time they just list "Core i7" which is meaningless without at least a model generation.
lbotos 4y ago
Agree on the misery. I was speccing out a build and inadvertently picked a 2019 processor because it was extremely unclear. (I'm now actually looking at an AMD 7700 rig, because intel won't do ECC on "desktop" CPUs, except for a rare chipset that I can't find a mobo for sale at the moment...)
- blagie 4y ago
  AMD + ECC is nice. That's how I'm set up. Also, RAID. I've been very happy with general system stability.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
kevin_thibedeau 4y ago
It's the Packard-Bell marketing strategy. Confuse the marketplace with a profusion of similar models so that comparison shopping can't be easily applied by casual buyers.
- blagie 4y ago
  That strategy works well in a lot of places, but it's not what's going on here. This is just plain old incompetence and mismanagement. It's a mess, rather than a strategy. For Intel, it just results in most buyers buying the cheapest possible system since there is no way to tell what's what. Intel would make a lot more selling $400 CPUs than $50 CPUs, but to do that, people would need to see the value.

by blagie 4y ago

tracker1 4y ago

The 13 generations is particularly bad, if you're just trying to comment to someone looking for a used system, when half the time they just list "Core i7" which is meaningless without at least a model generation.

lbotos 4y ago

Agree on the misery. I was speccing out a build and inadvertently picked a 2019 processor because it was extremely unclear. (I'm now actually looking at an AMD 7700 rig, because intel won't do ECC on "desktop" CPUs, except for a rare chipset that I can't find a mobo for sale at the moment...)

blagie 4y ago
AMD + ECC is nice. That's how I'm set up. Also, RAID. I've been very happy with general system stability.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

kevin_thibedeau 4y ago

It's the Packard-Bell marketing strategy. Confuse the marketplace with a profusion of similar models so that comparison shopping can't be easily applied by casual buyers.

blagie 4y ago
That strategy works well in a lot of places, but it's not what's going on here. This is just plain old incompetence and mismanagement. It's a mess, rather than a strategy. For Intel, it just results in most buyers buying the cheapest possible system since there is no way to tell what's what. Intel would make a lot more selling $400 CPUs than $50 CPUs, but to do that, people would need to see the value.