4 ms·

Great to see some competition coming but yeah sounds very clickbaity, it’s comparing the base M2 to what will apparently be the top of the line new AMD chip, in

by kmos17 3y ago

Great to see some competition coming but yeah sounds very clickbaity, it’s comparing the base M2 to what will apparently be the top of the line new AMD chip, instead of comparing it to the M2 max for example. “ the Ryzen 7 7840U, the initial flagship APU of the new series, apparently offers 9% better 3D rendering performance, 14% better responsiveness, and a whopping 72% better multiprocessing performance than the standard M2 There will be four new chips: the aforementioned Ryzen 7 7840U, the midrange Ryzen 5 7640U and 7540U, and the affordable Ryzen 3 7440U “ Also they’re not going to win on the marketing front with that naming strategy. Just awful. M1/2 and Pro/Max are so much simpler. It’s like Intel’s naming, such a mess.

catchnear4321 3y ago
Apple hasn’t been flawless with naming, but does seem less clumsy on average. Intel’s latest move is just absurd.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Apple hasn’t been flawless with naming, but does seem less clumsy on average. An extremely narrow range of SKU’s in a product line with an extremely short history makes that easier.
  - aloknnikhil 3y ago
    The range of SKUs is a problem AMD and Intel (particularly) brought upon themselves. It’s not easy for anyone trying to buy a laptop to truly estimate the power of the processor in there without first going through a review video. Id take the narrow range over that mess.
    - dragonwriter 3y ago
      > The range of SKUs is a problem AMD and Intel (particularly) brought upon themselves. Its a problem for simplicity of naming, its not a problem beyond that (and the alternative is a problem if you aren’t a vertically integrated producer supporting a fairly narrow end-user product line.)
goosedragons 3y ago
The 7945HX is already faster than the M2 Max and already available. The U line are competitors to the base M2 models. Apple's names are pretty awful, I get Pro/Max/Ultra confused and they aren't even unique identifiers either. Which M2 Pro? 10 core or 12 core? Why do CPUs with the same name have different core counts?
toast0 3y ago
> Also they’re not going to win on the marketing front with that naming strategy. Just awful. M1/2 and Pro/Max are so much simpler. It’s like Intel’s naming, such a mess. Apple has an easier time with processor names because they have a single customer that wants a simple product lineup. Amd and Intel sell their processors to OEMs that want to have products for every budget, so you end up with lots of processor skus and lots of laptop skus and have to do a bit of research to understand what you would be buying and have to decide what you want. On the plus side, you have lots of choices, on the minus side, you have lots of choices. Simple processor naming doesn't seem to stop Apple from naming every iPad 'the new iPad' though. But then again, other OEMs like to use the same product name and number for 3-7 different devices these days too, so everything is horrible, as usual.
jeroenhd 3y ago
Apple produces fewer chips but their naming isn't much better. Is the M1 Ultra faster than the M2 Pro? Is the M1 Max faster than the Ultra, or is the Max not the maximum? How does the M1 Pro compare to the M3? AMD generally uses the "bigger number within a generation is faster" and Apple uses some confusing adjectives. Either way the names only give a vague indication of performance.
- BirAdam 3y ago
  This. So much. The naming of products has gotten really silly and useless, and I put this blame on Intel and Apple. Apple started down the path of Pro, Pro Max, Ultra, Max, and Plus. Remember the iPhone XS? Idiotic naming there. Intel, otoh, just started doing crazy numeric strings with a random character added to the end. And this was after bad naming schemes like "Core 2 Quad". Part of the issue with GPUs and CPUs is the need to do binning to make IC manufacturing commercially viable so companies end up with a ton of SKUs, but the other part is just bad marketing. I know that advertising, marketing, and such generally have a bad reputation, but good branding, marketing, and advertising is essential to inform consumers about what they are buying (and thereby ensuring satisfied customers in the end), to differentiate products in the market, and to maintain a high quality brand image. Honestly, at this point, it would be better for Apple to just say: we have iPhone, bigger iPhone, more powerful iPhone, and both bigger and more powerful iPhone. On the CPU/GPU front, they should just list the core count and the iteration number. For Intel and AMD, the better route would be listing the specifications and creating a short hand for these specifications for those who are well versed in their product offerings, but then re-introducing things like "Pentium" or "Athlon" for the highest volume SKUs that people are most likely to buy. As regards the original article. Everyone already mentioned the TDP issue with the comparison between AMD and Apple, but Apple is also going to be introducing the M3. The rumor mill has it that the M3 will be a far more powerful product than M1 and M2, but this remains to be seen.
  - midoridensha 3y ago
    >Honestly, at this point, it would be better for Apple to just say: we have iPhone, bigger iPhone, more powerful iPhone, and both bigger and more powerful iPhone. They should call them: iPhone, iPhone Plus, iPhone Plus/2, iPhone Plus/3, iPhone Plus/4

by kmos17 3y ago

catchnear4321 3y ago

Apple hasn’t been flawless with naming, but does seem less clumsy on average. Intel’s latest move is just absurd.

dragonwriter 3y ago
> Apple hasn’t been flawless with naming, but does seem less clumsy on average. An extremely narrow range of SKU’s in a product line with an extremely short history makes that easier.
- aloknnikhil 3y ago
  The range of SKUs is a problem AMD and Intel (particularly) brought upon themselves. It’s not easy for anyone trying to buy a laptop to truly estimate the power of the processor in there without first going through a review video. Id take the narrow range over that mess.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > The range of SKUs is a problem AMD and Intel (particularly) brought upon themselves. Its a problem for simplicity of naming, its not a problem beyond that (and the alternative is a problem if you aren’t a vertically integrated producer supporting a fairly narrow end-user product line.)

goosedragons 3y ago

The 7945HX is already faster than the M2 Max and already available. The U line are competitors to the base M2 models. Apple's names are pretty awful, I get Pro/Max/Ultra confused and they aren't even unique identifiers either. Which M2 Pro? 10 core or 12 core? Why do CPUs with the same name have different core counts?

toast0 3y ago

> Also they’re not going to win on the marketing front with that naming strategy. Just awful. M1/2 and Pro/Max are so much simpler. It’s like Intel’s naming, such a mess. Apple has an easier time with processor names because they have a single customer that wants a simple product lineup. Amd and Intel sell their processors to OEMs that want to have products for every budget, so you end up with lots of processor skus and lots of laptop skus and have to do a bit of research to understand what you would be buying and have to decide what you want. On the plus side, you have lots of choices, on the minus side, you have lots of choices. Simple processor naming doesn't seem to stop Apple from naming every iPad 'the new iPad' though. But then again, other OEMs like to use the same product name and number for 3-7 different devices these days too, so everything is horrible, as usual.

jeroenhd 3y ago

Apple produces fewer chips but their naming isn't much better. Is the M1 Ultra faster than the M2 Pro? Is the M1 Max faster than the Ultra, or is the Max not the maximum? How does the M1 Pro compare to the M3? AMD generally uses the "bigger number within a generation is faster" and Apple uses some confusing adjectives. Either way the names only give a vague indication of performance.

BirAdam 3y ago
This. So much. The naming of products has gotten really silly and useless, and I put this blame on Intel and Apple. Apple started down the path of Pro, Pro Max, Ultra, Max, and Plus. Remember the iPhone XS? Idiotic naming there. Intel, otoh, just started doing crazy numeric strings with a random character added to the end. And this was after bad naming schemes like "Core 2 Quad". Part of the issue with GPUs and CPUs is the need to do binning to make IC manufacturing commercially viable so companies end up with a ton of SKUs, but the other part is just bad marketing. I know that advertising, marketing, and such generally have a bad reputation, but good branding, marketing, and advertising is essential to inform consumers about what they are buying (and thereby ensuring satisfied customers in the end), to differentiate products in the market, and to maintain a high quality brand image. Honestly, at this point, it would be better for Apple to just say: we have iPhone, bigger iPhone, more powerful iPhone, and both bigger and more powerful iPhone. On the CPU/GPU front, they should just list the core count and the iteration number. For Intel and AMD, the better route would be listing the specifications and creating a short hand for these specifications for those who are well versed in their product offerings, but then re-introducing things like "Pentium" or "Athlon" for the highest volume SKUs that people are most likely to buy. As regards the original article. Everyone already mentioned the TDP issue with the comparison between AMD and Apple, but Apple is also going to be introducing the M3. The rumor mill has it that the M3 will be a far more powerful product than M1 and M2, but this remains to be seen.
- midoridensha 3y ago
  >Honestly, at this point, it would be better for Apple to just say: we have iPhone, bigger iPhone, more powerful iPhone, and both bigger and more powerful iPhone. They should call them: iPhone, iPhone Plus, iPhone Plus/2, iPhone Plus/3, iPhone Plus/4