Tech Gaming Hardware discussion (& Hardware Sales) thread

I personally think Intel's change is an improvement. Letter is architecture, Ultra is better than core, bigger number is better if letters are equal. Plus for Lunar Lake, the last digit indicates 16 or 32GB for RAM since it's on-package.

That isn't to say it was a needed overhaul, but it's done at this point.

Average shopper has no concept of heterogenous core design, that's who the Core 3/5/7 labels are for. That's most of the market. Rule of thumb I always have to remind OEMs: if the specification isn't on the physical tag, it doesn't exist to 80 percent of shoppers.

This part is confusing, I can only assume Intel is leaving x90s, x70s, etc. for a potential refresh or KS equivalents.

Customers consistently struggle with AMD when the PC OEMs do market testing on names. Mostly due to the mixing of model year and architecture (first and third digits), you end up with chips that sound better actually being worse because the did a SKU with an older architecture. Plus AMD started at Ryzen AI 300 for the stupidest reason.

They did do that, the name is Core Ultra Series 1. Most product URLs include this.

You find indicating architecture with a letter more confusing than AMD using the third digit for the same thing?

How is this different from the old naming scheme? New architecture or yearly release has always meant a bigger number for Intel. Core Ultra Series 1 to Series 2 is clearer than going from 12th to 13th Gen Core (at least for now).

PS if you guys find Intel's naming scheme bad, just wait until you see Qualcomm's lol.
I personally think Intels change is an improvement. Letter is architecture, Ultra is better than core, bigger number is better if letters are equal. Plus Lunar Lake numbers within the same 10 (40s, etc)) denote ram configuration. I do agree though that the

Awesome buy. That original MSRP is inflated, but you got a deal either way. Especially since Canada Computers have been closing.
tenor.gif


SMH. The Core Ultra Series 1 was laptop processors. There was no Core 100S series that preceded the Core 200S series. That was the joke. Just some comic relief.

Steve Burke even mocked this during the leaks.


You try so hard. So so so very hard.
 
Meanwhile, Intel has embraced the Microsoft Xbox naming strategy. It seems designed to confuse people who are even passionate hobbyists.
"Hey, guys, guess what? We're rebooting naming! We're gonna call it Core Ultra!"
"Oh, okay, so it's going to be the Core Ultra 1st gen?"
"No, we're going to put hundred in the name."
"Oookay. So then the Core Ultra 100? Weird, but sounds great."
"Yeah. But, um, wait, no. Also an S. Yeah, an S sounds good. Put an S in it."
"WTF? Whatever, okay, so the Core Ultra 100s series?"
"Yep."
"Great. Sounds good."
"Just one little thing."
"Please stop."
"It's the 200s series."
"Oh, gotcha. My mistake. I'm embarrassed. I totally missed the 100s line that preceded it."
"Nothing preceded it."
You wrote all of this, I think it's not crazy that I missed what you're saying is sarcasm given it's a mini essay. Almost all the surveys I've seen on Intel's new naming were an improvement over the legacy one. Most of the grumbling at this point is standard change is hard stuff, which I get. That's human nature.

You also aren't wrong about awkwardness, I'd never deny it. But like I said, always cool to see how people actually shop around as a comparison to bigger picture stuff.
 
You wrote all of this, I think it's not crazy that I missed what you're saying is sarcasm given it's a mini essay. Almost all the surveys I've seen on Intel's new naming were an improvement over the legacy one. Most of the grumbling at this point is standard change is hard stuff, which I get. That's human nature.

You also aren't wrong about awkwardness, I'd never deny it. But like I said, always cool to see how people actually shop around as a comparison to bigger picture stuff.
How on earth do you not recognize the sarcasm in that post? It's so obvious. To be clear, yes, I'm mocking Intel's naming scheme.

You like the naming. Cool. You're the first geek in a sea of geeks I've seen opine that. Here's some jokes courtesy of Reddit, don't hurt yourself trying to interpret them.

And the first comment response:
 
How on earth do you not recognize the sarcasm in that post? It's so obvious. To be clear, yes, I'm mocking Intel's naming scheme.
Yeah, and I'm pointing out that the idea that the new Intel naming scheme is worse is non-sense. And there's been no evidence of customer dissatisfaction (from OEMs or end buyers) with the new names, and plenty of evidence to suggest the naming scheme was harmless or helpful (sell-out has been strong for Core Ultra and absolutely buried AMD and Qualcomm this summer).
You like the naming. Cool. You're the first geek in a sea of geeks I've seen opine that. Here's some jokes courtesy of Reddit, don't hurt yourself trying to interpret them.
The naming redo isn't for geeks, it's for the general public. I have no idea why you think a company should cater its naming to die hards instead of the 80% of their shoppers who are not geeks. If you don't like the naming scheme, totally fine, but I'm struggling to see how Core Ultra 200S vs Core Ultra 200V is less clear than 13500HX vs i5 1335U or i5 1334U.

There is a reason Walmart doesn't even usually post processor model numbers for PCs, despite having the highest proportion of top selling PCs out of any US merchant by far? Shoppers look at processor family, not processor models when they are in stores or online.
 
Yeah, and I'm pointing out that the idea that the new Intel naming scheme is worse is non-sense. And there's been no evidence of customer dissatisfaction (from OEMs or end buyers) with the new names, and plenty of evidence to suggest the naming scheme was harmless or helpful (sell-out has been strong for Core Ultra and absolutely buried AMD and Qualcomm this summer).
I'm glad Intel is doing well, but when has Intel not dominated sales in the laptop markets?
The naming redo isn't for geeks, it's for the general public. I have no idea why you think a company should cater its naming to die hards instead of the 80% of their shoppers who are not geeks. If you don't like the naming scheme, totally fine, but I'm struggling to see how Core Ultra 200S vs Core Ultra 200V is less clear than 13500HX vs i5 1335U or i5 1334U.

There is a reason Walmart doesn't even usually post processor model numbers for PCs, despite having the highest proportion of top selling PCs out of any US merchant by far? Shoppers look at processor family, not processor models when they are in stores or online.
LOL, the general public has no clue what anything means, ever. That's why you see sale prices on places like Craigslist, Facebook, and eBay for used systems so wildly incongruous to their hardware. As beer was explaining just a few posts ago, it's all gibberish to everyday shoppers after the i3 or i5 or i7.

But I can see they're very good at selling their pitch to the salesmen lower on the ladder. Corporations have that down to a science.
 
I'm glad Intel is doing well, but when has Intel not dominated sales in the laptop markets?
Pretty much always, but that's not my point. My point is we haven't seen a hit to Core Ultra sales, which have performed well compared to legacy Core, and Window's average price point this year has moved up. So clearly shoppers aren't avoiding Intel products due to the name change. Intel has also gained this year, but that's more complicated.
But I can see they're very good at selling their pitch to the salesmen lower on the ladder. Corporations have that down to a science.
That they are. But like I said, I'm not seeing where Intel naming is harder to follow now. It's been simplified, and only time will tell if Intel keeps it that way. The grumbling appears to all just be because it's different or, at worst, no better than the old naming structure.

Like is there an instance where an Intel chip is not clearly named or indicating what it is to the average consumer or hardcore enthusiast now?
 
god damn. whats up with their naming scheme?

core-ultra-naming-scheme.png.rendition.intel.web.1920.1080.png


Its a mouthful. For they dropped "i" in the Performance Tier and added "Ultra" to the Product Brand.

In no time people will be shorting it to its sku depiction. No one refers to the 7800X3D as the "AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D" or 14900K as the "Intel Core i9 processor 14900K" in general conversation.
 
How on earth do you not recognize the sarcasm in that post? It's so obvious. To be clear, yes, I'm mocking Intel's naming scheme.

You like the naming. Cool. You're the first geek in a sea of geeks I've seen opine that. Here's some jokes courtesy of Reddit, don't hurt yourself trying to interpret them.

And the first comment response:
 
Last edited:
Where things get really complicated is in their mobile SKUs (same with AMD). I constantly have to refer to the spec sheets to see just exactly what I'm looking at (With the U,V, H, HX suffix). It doesn't help matters when certain SKUs use last gen architecture despite being branded as being a current generation chip.
That's always been an issue. When you arbitrarily assign letters to indicate things like power states it's impossible to understand what it means without a reference in your hand unless you commit those suffixes to memory.

To dispense with the facetiousness, for a moment, though, that's one of the things about this new scheme that is muddled. Why am I joking about adding the "S", for example? Because the "S" indicates desktop series. Because you probably see "Core Series 200S" when you read headlines about the new processors, right? But the normal suffixes remain: K, KF, etc. That's how you have the "Intel Core Ultra 9 285K".

How does that simplify things for the general public? Because now they see, "285K", and it might lead them to believe it isn't a desktop processor, right? Yet it gets hairier. Remember the rare "KS" suffix? The one for the most extremely high-end binned variants of a chip? Maybe they won't make those anymore, because if they did, you'd see, "Intel Core Ultra 9 285KS", and hopefully you'd be forgiven if you made the errant assumption the S was just referring to the desktop series.

"Desktop series". You see that exact phrase covering the release in the headlines. Series. That's another source of confusion. They reboot the naming, and they use a term that historically has referred to different product lineups among electronics. Samsung makes the Galaxy S series. Nothing to do with the gen. "Series 1" refers to the generation, but now that term is conflated with "desktop series" or "laptop series" which has nothing to do with generation. Why not just "Gen"? Not sexy enough? Everyone understands the term "generation" refers to sequencing by product release date.

Also, as that Tom's Hardware article I mentioned pointed out when the scheme was announced over a year ago, there is "Core Processor" and "Core Ultra Processor". This is why avenue is saying "Ultra" is better than "Core":
Tom's Hardware said:
Perhaps the biggest outward change is the decision to drop the ‘i’ from the Core i3, i5, i7, and i9 lines. Here's a mockup of how the old branding would have looked for the coming 14900K chips, and a few examples of how it will look under the new official scheme:
  • OLD: Intel 14th-Generation Core i9-14900K Processor
  • NEW: Intel Core Ultra 9 processor 14900K
  • NEW: Intel Core 9 processor 14900K
  • AMD: Ryzen 9 7950X
But if you check Intel's website, there is also just "Processor":
Intel said:
Intel® Processors provide the performance you need for essential tasks like web browsing. At an affordable price, these processors are a good choice for those who anticipate only light computing needs.

Intel® Core™ processors offer outstanding performance you can trust for both your personal and professional computing requirements. If you use your PC for creating documents and spreadsheets, web browsing, streaming videos, videoconferencing, and casual gaming, then Intel® Core™ processors are likely a good fit for you.

Intel® Core™ Ultra processors include a specialized AI processing unit alongside supercharged performance to support advanced, innovative use cases and demanding applications. If you’re a creator who’s editing images and video, a live streamer needing to deliver a smooth broadcast, or a gamer seeking higher frame rates on the go, you’ll want to invest in a PC with a premium Intel® Core® Ultra processor paired with an available, built-in Intel® Arc™ GPU.
WTF is going on here? Because if you notice, the whole thing might have been justified as a glorified rebranding of the same strategy. Gamers will come up with shorthand no matter what. So expect us to go from:
Intel Core i9 14900K ----> i9-14900K
to...
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (Series 2) --> CU9-285K

All they did was add a letter. How does that simplify things for the general public? i9 > i7 > i5 > i3. However misleading that could possibly be, it worked. It was simple. Now they have to deal with CU9 > C9 > CU7 > C7 > CU5 > C5 > CU3 > C3? And is C9 better than CU7, for example? What about the regular processors like what Pentium and Celeron lines came to represent? They were below i3. We usually didn't shorthand the "Pentium" part, but you'd write "Pentium G640" instead of "i3-10300". So if there is a non-Core, non-Core Ultra processor, how do I shorthand that, now? Just the 9? It becomes "9-285K"? CU9 > C9 > 9 > CU7 > C7 > 7 > CU5 > C5 > 5 > CU3 > C3 > 3.

Simple, see!

It's not that I don't understand the idea. It's all about what's on the box. Now you can see "Series 2" on the bottom of the box below "Unlocked", and see "Intel Core" and "Ultra" in the middle, and then "9" up in the top right hand corner. Surely everyday shoppers will immediately grasp the significance of all these numbers. You know, when the soccer mom purchases her CPU a la carte before building a PC. LOL, okay, but I kid again. I'm sure they'll try to implement the same type of on-box branding for prebuilts on the box at the Wal-Mart. Because that's the only way people buy their computers, now. On at a box at a store. Not from an Amazon link where so much of that on-box brand formatting often gets lost.
200S-01-2.jpeg
 
That's always been an issue. When you arbitrarily assign letters to indicate things like power states it's impossible to understand what it means without a reference in your hand unless you commit those suffixes to memory.

To dispense with the facetiousness, for a moment, though, that's one of the things about this new scheme that is muddled. Why am I joking about adding the "S", for example? Because the "S" indicates desktop series. Because you probably see "Core Series 200S" when you read headlines about the new processors, right? But the normal suffixes remain: K, KF, etc. That's how you have the "Intel Core Ultra 9 285K".

How does that simplify things for the general public? Because now they see, "285K", and it might lead them to believe it isn't a desktop processor, right? Yet it gets hairier. Remember the rare "KS" suffix? The one for the most extremely high-end binned variants of a chip? Maybe they won't make those anymore, because if they did, you'd see, "Intel Core Ultra 9 285KS", and hopefully you'd be forgiven if you made the errant assumption the S was just referring to the desktop series.

"Desktop series". You see that exact phrase covering the release in the headlines. Series. That's another source of confusion. They reboot the naming, and they use a term that historically has referred to different product lineups among electronics. Samsung makes the Galaxy S series. Nothing to do with the gen. "Series 1" refers to the generation, but now that term is conflated with "desktop series" or "laptop series" which has nothing to do with generation. Why not just "Gen"? Not sexy enough? Everyone understands the term "generation" refers to sequencing by product release date.

Also, as that Tom's Hardware article I mentioned pointed out when the scheme was announced over a year ago, there is "Core Processor" and "Core Ultra Processor". This is why avenue is saying "Ultra" is better than "Core":

But if you check Intel's website, there is also just "Processor":

WTF is going on here? Because if you notice, the whole thing might have been justified as a glorified rebranding of the same strategy. Gamers will come up with shorthand no matter what. So expect us to go from:
Intel Core i9 14900K ----> i9-14900K
to...
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K (Series 2) --> CU9-285K

All they did was add a letter. How does that simplify things for the general public? i9 > i7 > i5 > i3. However misleading that could possibly be, it worked. It was simple. Now they have to deal with CU9 > C9 > CU7 > C7 > CU5 > C5 > CU3 > C3? And is C9 better than CU7, for example? What about the regular processors like what Pentium and Celeron lines came to represent? They were below i3. We usually didn't shorthand the "Pentium" part, but you'd write "Pentium G640" instead of "i3-10300". So if there is a non-Core, non-Core Ultra processor, how do I shorthand that, now? Just the 9? It becomes "9-285K"? CU9 > C9 > 9 > CU7 > C7 > 7 > CU5 > C5 > 5 > CU3 > C3 > 3.

Simple, see!

It's not that I don't understand the idea. It's all about what's on the box. Now you can see "Series 2" on the bottom of the box below "Unlocked", and see "Intel Core" and "Ultra" in the middle, and then "9" up in the top right hand corner. Surely everyday shoppers will immediately grasp the significance of all these numbers. You know, when the soccer mom purchases her CPU a la carte before building a PC. LOL, okay, but I kid again. I'm sure they'll try to implement the same type of on-box branding for prebuilts on the box at the Wal-Mart. Because that's the only way people buy their computers, now. On at a box at a store. Not from an Amazon link where so much of that on-box brand formatting often gets lost.
200S-01-2.jpeg
Embargo until October 10? Is it just me or have the tech channels not reviewed these yet? I know some have talked about it but I haven't seen any benchmarks.
 
Embargo until October 10? Is it just me or have the tech channels not reviewed these yet? I know some have talked about it but I haven't seen any benchmarks.
The 24th.
Both the lifting of the review embargo and the launch of the chips for sale is slated for October 24th. That's usually not a good sign when both are on the same day.
 
Gotcha, I was going off that photo that says October 10th
Nice catch. I didn't even notice that. Old photo. I can't recall if the launch date got pushed back. I know there was a slew of headlines negatively covering the delay of AMD's most recent line. So maybe it was just the embargo, or both, but I was oblivious to this.
 
To dispense with the facetiousness, for a moment, though, that's one of the things about this new scheme that is muddled. Why am I joking about adding the "S", for example? Because the "S" indicates desktop series. Because you probably see "Core Series 200S" when you read headlines about the new processors, right? But the normal suffixes remain: K, KF, etc. That's how you have the "Intel Core Ultra 9 285K".
S indicates Arrow Lake, not desktop, and differentiates from Lunar Lake. It cuts across mobile and desktop and is about as client facing as saying Alder Lake.
Now they have to deal with CU9 > C9 > CU7 > C7 > CU5 > C5 > CU3 > C3? And is C9 better than CU7, for example?
They already do this for mobile silicon, it hasn't be as simple as C3-C9 anytime recently. There's no C9 or CU3, and Intel already does split architectures within C7, for example. It's a wash to me, instead of getting as many letter suffixes at the end (several were discontinued), you get the indicator at the front. Asking if C9 is better than CU7 is like asking if a U processor is better than HX. The confusion is already present.
But if you check Intel's website, there is also just "Processor":
That's from discontinuing Celeron and Pentium in 2022 . Like I said, I don't know if the new naming scheme will be an improvement a few years form now, but it's certainly no more confusing than legacy Intel mobile naming, or god forbid AMD (good luck if you're an average shopper trying to figure out G vs X vs X3D for desktops). I suspect most folks will have forgotten about these changes in a few years.
I'm sure they'll try to implement the same type of on-box branding for prebuilts on the box at the Wal-Mart. Because that's the only way people buy their computers, now. On at a box at a store. Not from an Amazon link where so much of that on-box brand formatting often gets lost.
You say this like Walmart, Best Buy, and Costco don't each sell vastly gaming desktops Amazon. For whatever reason, US shoppers hate buying gaming desktops without seeing them physically.
 
S indicates Arrow Lake, not desktop, and differentiates from Lunar Lake. It cuts across mobile and desktop and is about as client facing as saying Alder Lake.
tony-stark-iron-man-facepalm-l0wrbvyfw6iyx88w.gif

Arrow Lake-S is a desktop series. The S reflects Arrow Lake-S.
FPS Review said:

Intel Core Ultra 200S Series Processors (K-SKUs)​

The CPUs will be available for sales and pre-orders on October 24th. The official name for this series is Intel Core Ultra 200S Series CPUs, the -S denoting Desktop variants, not to be confused with the mobile parts.
See that in the Wiki? See how it's "-S" for the desktop variants of Arrow Lake? That's because the Mobile variants within that architecture will carry a different suffix: HX, H, U, etc.

You can see this with past generations.
See how the Raptor Lake desktop variants carry the "-S" suffix? But the Raptor Lake mobile variants don't?

Not that it matters. Don't you get it? They've integrated that suffix into the general series branding now while not removing the suffix for individual processors as they've always existed. Before it was "Intel Core 14th Gen S-series." They kept it separate, you see? And Gen denoted the gen because...at least that much made sense!!
 
Arrow Lake-S is a desktop series. The S reflects Arrow Lake-S.
Ooops, you're correct, S is a holdover from the old naming scheme. It's always been there and in PDPs. So not part of the naming scheme changes, unless we're saying Intel should have dropped it.
ot that it matters. Don't you get it? They've integrated that suffix into the general series branding now while not removing the suffix for individual processors as they've always existed. Before it was "Intel Core 14th Gen S-series." They kept it separate, you see? And Gen denoted the gen because...at least that much made sense!!
It has been a 50/50 chance in recent years whether Walmart or Best Buy would put Raptor Lake S or the actual generation. So this change isn't anything a big shift, it'll either be a slight improvement or the same mouthfuls we've always seen. Just FYI US merchants don't actually put Core Ultra Series 1 on most price tags. It's too long. So it's moot.

I've yet to see any OEM or retailer complain about this change, and I've talked to nearly every single one, which leads me to think again, most of the griping is just enthusiast echo chamber chatter about different being scary, rather than actual confusion from customers. But to each their own.
 
Anyone with some good desk recommendations? Finally going to splurge on a better desk after using junk for decades. There are so many options, like with everything now, and it’s easy to get lost in minutiae of them. Would prefer an L shape, but open to everything, and that’s part of the problem.

Got 1k for it, but don’t really want to go to my ceiling if I don’t necessarily have to. Any advice or recommendations is appreciated!
 
Anyone with some good desk recommendations? Finally going to splurge on a better desk after using junk for decades. There are so many options, like with everything now, and it’s easy to get lost in minutiae of them. Would prefer an L shape, but open to everything, and that’s part of the problem.

Got 1k for it, but don’t really want to go to my ceiling if I don’t necessarily have to. Any advice or recommendations is appreciated!
Do you need drawers, cable pass through, etc? Or just a literal desk is fine?
 
Do you need drawers, cable pass through, etc? Or just a literal desk is fine?
Drawers I can take or leave. Cable pass through is a yes. Got to be a clean look. Should have added at least that much.

I keep getting ads for several, and all seem nice. The secret lab magnus pro looks nice, but it’s pricey, and don’t know enough about them to really have a sense of fair prices. Definitely could continue to look, but real time feedback is always better.
 
Last edited:
There's always the good old DIY Ikea setup.

A couple of Alex cabinets, and a butcher block coutner top.
 
Back
Top