5 ms·

Meanwhile, the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT GPU exists and is used in both new portable eGPUs: the GPD G1 (which I own) and the ONEXGPU which is being crowdfunded rig

by chx 3y ago

Meanwhile, the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT GPU exists and is used in both new portable eGPUs: the GPD G1 (which I own) and the ONEXGPU which is being crowdfunded right now. It is a slightly more powerful version of the 7700S. I am sure this naming makes sense and it's only me who misses something.

Dalewyn 3y ago
One of the reasons I never ever consider AMD hardware when I'm looking to buy something is because the naming schemes do not make any sense. For example: Did you know some Ryzen 7000 CPUs, introduced with the Zen 4 architecture, are Zen 2 and Zen 3 and also Zen 3+?[1] Did you know Ryzen 3000 spans Zen, Zen+, and Zen 2?[2] And here's the kicker: Ryzen 5000 is the 4th generation of Ryzen CPUs, based on Zen 3 which is the 4th generation of Zen, except the Ryzen APUs which are based on Zen 2 which is the 3rd generation of Zen. Oh by the way, Zen 4 is the 6th generation of Zen. Yeah. I very sincerely ain't got time for this fucking nonsense. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Mobile_6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Mobile_6 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Ryzen_3000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Ryzen_3000
- red-iron-pine 3y ago
  Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? > Yeah. I very sincerely ain't got time for this fucking nonsense. aye, is also most of what you said. if following a naming schema is too hard for you mon ami then stop buying hardware independently and pick up whatever Alienware is releasing this quarter.
  - Dalewyn 3y ago
    >Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? Surprisingly: Yes. They (usually) don't label inferior/older tech as new tech, for one. If Intel says something is 12th gen or 13th gen or 14th gen, it generally is. Likewise Nvidia, if they say something is 3rd gen or 4th gen, it generally is. This already greatly simplifies things; numbers actually mean something. Then they don't have more suffixes and prefixes than I can be bothered to remember. Intel? The first number (eg: i7) denotes class within generation. First one or two digits in the second number denote generation (eg: 12 in 12700K). The third number denotes tier within the class (eg: 700 in 12700K). The suffix, if any, denotes overclocking (K), supremely-special (S), no graphics (F), powerful mobile (H), desktop repurposed for mobile (HX), power-saving (P), and ultra power-saving (U). For Nvidia, it's either GTX or RTX prefix for no raytracing or raytracing enabled respectively. Then the first one or two digits in the number denotes generation, and the following digits denote tier within the generation. Super or Ti are appended for higher tier models of the same number. Meanwhile, what the sincere fuck is AMD?
    - reisse 3y ago
      > If Intel says something is 12th gen or 13th gen or 14th gen, it generally is. 10th and 11th generations included both 14 nm and 10 nm CPUs, now 14th gen is in some weird state when it coexists with Core Ultra on Intel 4 (7 nm) chips. > The first number (eg: i7) denotes class within generation. First one or two digits in the second number denote generation (eg: 12 in 12700K). The third number denotes tier within the class (eg: 700 in 12700K). So what is i7-1065G7 then? Or Core Ultra 5 135U? > Then they don't have more suffixes and prefixes than I can be bothered to remember. You forgot at least T, XE, N, G. That's only the ones I remember, there are definitely more.
      - NekkoDroid 3y ago
        According to their own website, the "Intel® Core™ Processors (14th gen)" has the following suffixes: K, F, S, T, X/XE, HX, HK, H, P, U, Y, G1-G7, E, UE, HE, UL, HL (17 not counting those grouped together) https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor...
    - yourusername 3y ago
      >If Intel says something is 12th gen or 13th gen or 14th gen, it generally is. 14th gen is 13th gen with a minor clockspeed boost on desktop.
    - _cenw 3y ago
      Don't forget NVIDIA trying to sell the now named 4070 as a different 4080.
    - toast0 3y ago
      When you get down to the lower marketed brands, like Pentium and Celeron, and sometimes i3, things get really messy. If it's got a suffix, it's a core core (having to say core core is of course, an Intel naming problem too), and if it's got a prefix, it's an atom core. And of course, the numbers are offset from the other brands for no particular reason.
  - reisse 3y ago
    Intel is definitely on the same level. 10-th gen Intel Core had two different architectures for laptop chips - both 14 nm Comet Lake and 10 nm Ice Lake. 11-th gen Intel Core was 14 nm on desktop, but 10 nm on laptops. Now Intel 14-th gen is 10 nm Raptor Lake Refresh on desktops and laptops, but also 7 nm (Intel 4) Meteor Lake on a specific laptops, as Core Ultra.
  - cassianoleal 3y ago
    > Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? I don't know about Nvidia but Intel certainly isn't. Check out this Gamers Nexus video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A
  - NekkoDroid 3y ago
    > Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? I remember when Intel brought out some new mobile processor and didn't mention it's entire name ONCE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFHBgb9SY1Y&t=17s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFHBgb9SY1Y&t=17s (This is just the most memerable part. The entire video is an interesting watch) Then they also recently (december) brought out slides about "Core Truths" in which they actually explained AMDs naming scheme decently well, while completely ignoring their own mobile naming scheme (they removed those slides very fast, but here is a video covering it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A) Not to say AMDs naming scheme is completely faultless (e.g. they could have at least move the architecture number from 3rd to 2nd index), but I'd rather have an explained consistent naming scheme, than one that changes on how they are feeling that day (https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor...). (Also, as a general tip: don't think too much about the naming and treat them like almost anyone does on TVs/Monitors, aka just as product identifiers)
- _cenw 3y ago
  From Ryzen 7000 forward, the third number is the core generation, and this weird mixing is only true outside desktop too (see the 5600X3D). That's also because AMD keeps die shrinking older generations of processors (i.e. the Steam Deck), but not as far down as Zen 4 because they're still capacity limited there. So it makes sense to keep 6-7nm designs alive for longer.
- coffeebeqn 3y ago
  Intel is not any better with their increasingly long number names. I guess Apple so far has followed a logical numbering scheme but they only have a few SKUs compared to hundreds from AMD and Intel
- dist-epoch 3y ago
  You don't buy a naming scheme, you buy a particular CPU.

by chx 3y ago

Dalewyn 3y ago

One of the reasons I never ever consider AMD hardware when I'm looking to buy something is because the naming schemes do not make any sense. For example: Did you know some Ryzen 7000 CPUs, introduced with the Zen 4 architecture, are Zen 2 and Zen 3 and also Zen 3+?[1] Did you know Ryzen 3000 spans Zen, Zen+, and Zen 2?[2] And here's the kicker: Ryzen 5000 is the 4th generation of Ryzen CPUs, based on Zen 3 which is the 4th generation of Zen, except the Ryzen APUs which are based on Zen 2 which is the 3rd generation of Zen. Oh by the way, Zen 4 is the 6th generation of Zen. Yeah. I very sincerely ain't got time for this fucking nonsense. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Mobile_6 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Mobile_6 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Ryzen_3000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryzen#Ryzen_3000

red-iron-pine 3y ago
Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? > Yeah. I very sincerely ain't got time for this fucking nonsense. aye, is also most of what you said. if following a naming schema is too hard for you mon ami then stop buying hardware independently and pick up whatever Alienware is releasing this quarter.
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  >Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? Surprisingly: Yes. They (usually) don't label inferior/older tech as new tech, for one. If Intel says something is 12th gen or 13th gen or 14th gen, it generally is. Likewise Nvidia, if they say something is 3rd gen or 4th gen, it generally is. This already greatly simplifies things; numbers actually mean something. Then they don't have more suffixes and prefixes than I can be bothered to remember. Intel? The first number (eg: i7) denotes class within generation. First one or two digits in the second number denote generation (eg: 12 in 12700K). The third number denotes tier within the class (eg: 700 in 12700K). The suffix, if any, denotes overclocking (K), supremely-special (S), no graphics (F), powerful mobile (H), desktop repurposed for mobile (HX), power-saving (P), and ultra power-saving (U). For Nvidia, it's either GTX or RTX prefix for no raytracing or raytracing enabled respectively. Then the first one or two digits in the number denotes generation, and the following digits denote tier within the generation. Super or Ti are appended for higher tier models of the same number. Meanwhile, what the sincere fuck is AMD?
  - reisse 3y ago
    > If Intel says something is 12th gen or 13th gen or 14th gen, it generally is. 10th and 11th generations included both 14 nm and 10 nm CPUs, now 14th gen is in some weird state when it coexists with Core Ultra on Intel 4 (7 nm) chips. > The first number (eg: i7) denotes class within generation. First one or two digits in the second number denote generation (eg: 12 in 12700K). The third number denotes tier within the class (eg: 700 in 12700K). So what is i7-1065G7 then? Or Core Ultra 5 135U? > Then they don't have more suffixes and prefixes than I can be bothered to remember. You forgot at least T, XE, N, G. That's only the ones I remember, there are definitely more.
    - NekkoDroid 3y ago
      According to their own website, the "Intel® Core™ Processors (14th gen)" has the following suffixes: K, F, S, T, X/XE, HX, HK, H, P, U, Y, G1-G7, E, UE, HE, UL, HL (17 not counting those grouped together) https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor...
  - yourusername 3y ago
    >If Intel says something is 12th gen or 13th gen or 14th gen, it generally is. 14th gen is 13th gen with a minor clockspeed boost on desktop.
  - _cenw 3y ago
    Don't forget NVIDIA trying to sell the now named 4070 as a different 4080.
  - toast0 3y ago
    When you get down to the lower marketed brands, like Pentium and Celeron, and sometimes i3, things get really messy. If it's got a suffix, it's a core core (having to say core core is of course, an Intel naming problem too), and if it's got a prefix, it's an atom core. And of course, the numbers are offset from the other brands for no particular reason.
- reisse 3y ago
  Intel is definitely on the same level. 10-th gen Intel Core had two different architectures for laptop chips - both 14 nm Comet Lake and 10 nm Ice Lake. 11-th gen Intel Core was 14 nm on desktop, but 10 nm on laptops. Now Intel 14-th gen is 10 nm Raptor Lake Refresh on desktops and laptops, but also 7 nm (Intel 4) Meteor Lake on a specific laptops, as Core Ultra.
- cassianoleal 3y ago
  > Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? I don't know about Nvidia but Intel certainly isn't. Check out this Gamers Nexus video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A
- NekkoDroid 3y ago
  > Is Intel or Nvidia even better about this? I remember when Intel brought out some new mobile processor and didn't mention it's entire name ONCE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFHBgb9SY1Y&t=17s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFHBgb9SY1Y&t=17s (This is just the most memerable part. The entire video is an interesting watch) Then they also recently (december) brought out slides about "Core Truths" in which they actually explained AMDs naming scheme decently well, while completely ignoring their own mobile naming scheme (they removed those slides very fast, but here is a video covering it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUT4d5IVY0A) Not to say AMDs naming scheme is completely faultless (e.g. they could have at least move the architecture number from 3rd to 2nd index), but I'd rather have an explained consistent naming scheme, than one that changes on how they are feeling that day (https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor-numbers.html https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/processor...). (Also, as a general tip: don't think too much about the naming and treat them like almost anyone does on TVs/Monitors, aka just as product identifiers)
_cenw 3y ago
From Ryzen 7000 forward, the third number is the core generation, and this weird mixing is only true outside desktop too (see the 5600X3D). That's also because AMD keeps die shrinking older generations of processors (i.e. the Steam Deck), but not as far down as Zen 4 because they're still capacity limited there. So it makes sense to keep 6-7nm designs alive for longer.
coffeebeqn 3y ago
Intel is not any better with their increasingly long number names. I guess Apple so far has followed a logical numbering scheme but they only have a few SKUs compared to hundreds from AMD and Intel
dist-epoch 3y ago
You don't buy a naming scheme, you buy a particular CPU.