Intel’s chip naming conventions have been a bit confusing in recent years. You probably know that when it comes to performance a Core i7 chip is probably more powerful than a Core i5… which beats a Core i3.*

But the Celeron and Pentium families? Those are a bit of a mess since Intel uses those names for two completely different chip architectures.

For example, Intel’s current Pentium chips for laptops includes the 6 watt Pentium N4200 quad-core Apollo Lake chip, the 6 watt Pentium 4415Y dual-core Kaby Lake chip, and the 15 watt Pentium 4415U dual-core Kaby Lake processor. The Kaby Lake models features faster graphics, support more memory, and are generally more capable chips… but it’s hard to tell that from the name alone.

So maybe it’s not surprising that Intel is changing its Pentium branding. The company is now referring to some Pentium Kaby Lake chips as “Pentium Gold.”

Intel released a product change notification for its Pentium G4560, G4600, and G4620 desktop processors this week to indicate that those chips will now be labeled as Pentium Gold. But it looks like some laptop processors like the Pentium 4415Y are also getting the new branding.

Meanwhile, rumor has it that the Pentium chips that will replace the current Apollo Lake line of low-cost & low power processors will be branded as “Pentium Silver.”

So there you have it: Pentium Gold > Pentium Silver. That should make it a little easier to differentiate these chips at a glance. At least until Intel changes its name scheme again.

The company hasn’t introduced any new 8th-gen Kaby Lake-R or Coffee Lake Celeron or Pentium chips yet. So maybe they’ll be Pentium Titanium or something.

Meanwhile, the Celeron names are as confusing as ever.

*Yes, I know things get a lot murkier when you start looking at the numbers and letters that come after that (a Core i5-7y54 chip is way less powerful than a Core i3-7350K). And this year’s Core i5 may offer better performance than last year’s Core i7 in some circumstances… But I really just wanted to talk about Pentium and Celeron chips, OK?

via Guru3D

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker* and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign

or...

Contribute via PayPal

* If you are using an ad blocker like uBlock Origin and seeing a pop-up message at the bottom of the screen, we have a guide that may help you disable it.

Subscribe to Liliputing via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 9,544 other subscribers

13 replies on “Intel rebrands Kaby Lake Pentium chips as “Pentium Gold””

  2. Intel’s naming convention is deliberately confusing. The OCD side of me says they should abandon their old Pentium microarchitecture (found in Atoms, Celerons, and Pentiums). And opt completely for a unified “Core i” family, by arranging the lineup from the least power hungry (TDP) to the most power hungry by using vowels. Then attach a generation number, and a unit number. Possibly utilising a new microarchitecture. Thus using a new family-name instead of Pentium, Celeron, Atom, or Core…. possibly something like “Bit” “Net” “Fiber” “Key” “Cell” “Eso” “Nub” “Axis” “Orb” “Nexus” “Pole” “Base” “Soul” “Root” “Hub” “Vita” “Life” “Cess”

    Hence, it would look like this:
    Chip Family (Cell), Power Class (a), Quality Standing (1-), Generation Number (1), Model Number (00)
    $ = RRP, W = TDP, 2c = 2 cores, 2t = 2 threads, (base speed) – (max speed on all cores)
    Quality 1 = low, Quality 3 = medium, Quality 6 = high, Quality 9 = best binned + unlocked multiplier

    Intel Cell A1-100: $30, 2W, 2 core/2 thread, 1GHz – 1.4GHz
    Intel Cell A3-100: $40, 2W, 2 core/2 thread, 1GHz – 1.9GHz
    Intel Cell A6-100, $50, 2W, 2 core/4 thread, 1GHz – 1.9GHz
    Intel Cell A9-100, $60, 2W, 2 core/4 thread, 1GHz – 2.1GHz

    Intel Cell E1-100: $60, 4W, 2 core/2 thread, 1.3GHz – 1.9GHz
    Intel Cell E3-100: $70, 4W, 2 core/2 thread, 1.3GHz – 2.4GHz
    Intel Cell E6-100: $80, 4W, 2 core/4 thread, 1.3GHz – 2.4GHz
    Intel Cell E9-100: $90, 4W, 2 core/4 thread, 1.3GHz – 2.6GHz

    Intel Cell i1-100: $90.0 8W, 2 core/2 thread, 1.6GHz – 2.4GHz
    Intel Cell i3-100: $110, 8W, 2 core/4 thread, 1.6GHz – 3.0GHz
    Intel Cell i6-100: $140, 8W, 4 core/4 thread, 1.6GHz – 2.9GHz
    Intel Cell i9-100: $150, 8W, 4 core/4 thread, 1.6GHz – 3.1GHz

    Intel Cell O1-100: $150, 16W, 2 core/4 thread, 1.9GHz – 2.9GHz
    Intel Cell O3-100: $180, 16W, 4 core/4 thread, 1.9GHz – 3.4GHz
    Intel Cell O6-100: $200, 16W, 4 core/8 thread, 1.9GHz – 3.4GHz
    Intel Cell O9-100: $210, 16W, 4 core/8 thread, 1.9GHz – 3.6GHz

    Intel Cell U1-100: $210, 32W, 4 core/4 thread, 2.2GHz – 3.4GHz
    Intel Cell U3-100: $240, 32W, 4 core/4 thread, 2.2GHz – 3.9GHz
    Intel Cell U6-100: $280, 32W, 4 core/8 thread, 2.2GHz – 3.9GHz
    Intel Cell U9-100: $300, 32W, 4 core/8 thread, 2.2GHz – 4.1GHz

    Intel Cell Y1-100: $300, 64W, 4 core/8 thread, 2.5GHz – 3.9GHz
    Intel Cell Y3-100: $380, 64W, 6 core/12 thread, 2.5GHz – 3.9GHz
    Intel Cell Y6-100: $430, 64W, 6 core/12 thread, 2.5GHz – 4.4GHz
    Intel Cell Y9-100: $450, 64W, 6 core/12 thread, 2.5GHz – 4.6GHz

    Intel Cell Z1-100: $450, 96W, 6 core/12 thread, 3.0GHz – 4.4GHz
    Intel Cell Z3-100: $500, 96W, 8 core/16 thread, 3.0GHz – 4.4GHz
    Intel Cell Z6-100: $550, 96W, 8 core/16 thread, 3.0GHz – 4.9GHz
    Intel Cell Z9-100: $600, 96W, 8core/16 thread, 3.0GHz – 5.1GHz
    …. … … etc etc

      1. Haha lol.
        I’m glad you got see how much straight-forward and easy to understand things could be if a few of us OCD-demons worked in higher places, such as Product Naming and Marketing positions ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    2. They won’t. Just like MS wont give up it’s endless versions of Windows. Neither will have a future in the consumer tech world alongside Apple/Google.

      They are both alot like the modern Democratic party, they wont stop shooting themselves in the foot until they are completely irrelevant.

  3. Intel’s naming convention is beyond confusing, except that it’s not the result of cluelessness, but rather a contrived ploy to fool less knowledgeable customers – the last cheap move, last year, was to rename m5 and m7 CoreM chips as Core i5/7 with just a Y in the name to convene the difference.

    1. To be fair, Intel just uses those as codenames. It’s dumbass bloggers and journalists like me that keep using them after the chips are released to the public.

      Technically what we’re talking about there are “7th Gen Intel Core processors…” even though these have names that start with Pentium rather than Core.

      Actually you know what? That’s why we keep saying “Kaby Lake.”

  6. I think the naming should denote the family (i3, i5, i7, Pentium, etc), the number of cores, year released, and the minimum/maximum clock speed. This would not be fool-proof but would give buyers a good starting point.

    As for Celeron, they can use Copper, Tin, Lead.
    😉

  7. This isn’t going to keep you from needing to research the particular CPU when you buy. And a couple of years from now it won’t tell you anything unless maybe the new CPUs become Pentium Platinum.

    It almost makes me long for the days when the choice was between a 486-33, 486-66 or 487-99, but the prices are better now!

  8. That’s a welcome change. I honestly can’t tell what’s at the heart of all the low end PCs coming out of china. Quad? Dual? Speed? It’s at the point where I ignore everything that isn’t labelled i3, i5 etc. and therefore at least a Core M.

Comments are closed.