Nehalem to become Core i7 processor

Intel's Nehalem processor architecture will still hold to the Core naming scheme when it appears late this year, if an apparent leak of company logos proves authentic. Although the platform will make fundamental changes, Nehalem will reportedly be known as Core i7 for at least all its desktop variants, which will include dual- and quad-core mainstream processors as well as a 3.2GHz Extreme processor for high-end gaming desktops.

The reason for the change is unclear, though Intel will have an increasing number of cores with the new architecture and so will have a harder time maintaining a simple naming scheme for its processors as for Core 2, which has been split into Solo, Duo, and Quad variants. The i7 refers to Nehalem as the seventh x86 platform generation to come from Intel.

The alleged slip doesn't indicate whether the naming will apply to mobile processors, although these in recent years have kept the same name as their desktop counterparts. Workstation- and server-class processors have usually kept to the Xeon naming system.

Intel is believed ready to announce its first Core i7 processors on August 11th but with shipping only taking place in the fall. Notebook-ready versions are still due in early 2009.


News Source: MacNN via Expreview

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Vista's Security Rendered Completely Useless by New Exploit

Next Story

Google Gadgets an Open Door for Attack

66 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

LOL - I think its hilarious people cant grasp the naming scheme - if it really is that difficult to you -- then try drawing pictures...maybe a color-by-numbers ?? Or how about just showing on your fingers how many cores there are --- and toes when we get to 16 .... feel safer ?

WTF. Just give us Core 3 already. It's the natural successor to Core 2 - consumers don't need any more confusion.

That and they can start naming by core as well; so for example, Core 3 x8 would be 8 cores. I think its neat... someone else would probably complain though.

wow this is silly make it more confusing then it already is to help people. doesn't make any logical sense

Core 2 duo
Core 2 quad
Core 2 extreme

now Core i7 duo Exxxx
Core i7 quad Qxxxx
Core i7 extreme Xxxxx

O.o

I don't get the name hate. I think it's a simple enough name based on how Intel sees their processors categorized. As for the generational thing, I think people are looking *way* too deeply into it.

Let's say Pentium can be considered the 'fifth' because of the pent- prefix. Let's just make it really kindergarten simple like that. Intel didn't move away from the Pentium branding until Core came along (whether it was PPro/P2/P3/P4, it was still 'Pent'ium). The Core line would then, in this kindergarten way of thinking, become the sixth generation, and anything 'Core' would stay in this category. The first line to separate would become the seventh.

Now, they broke the rule by leaving Core in the name of the i7, but regardless, they're welcome to categorize whatever the upcoming generation is going to be as the 'seventh'.

People pay too much attention to details and don't look at the words staring them in the face. :3

Let's say Pentium can be considered the 'fifth' because of the pent- prefix.

How about because it actually was the fifth, it was originally called the 80586. However the courts ruled that they could not trademark numbers, so they came up with a name meaning 5 that they could trademark. It was the followup to the 80486 and architecturally was clearly a new generation chip.

Intel didn't move away from the Pentium branding until Core came along

Branding has nothing to do with what generation the chips were, unless you believe the original 60MHz Pentium from 1993 and the final Pentium 4 are members of the same generation. Sorry but I don't think so. It's like saying the PS3 is a fifth generation console because it still uses the name Playstation.

(Skyfrog said @ #17.1)
Let's say Pentium can be considered the 'fifth' because of the pent- prefix.

How about because it actually was the fifth, it was originally called the 80586. However the courts ruled that they could not trademark numbers, so they came up with a name meaning 5 that they could trademark. It was the followup to the 80486 and architecturally was clearly a new generation chip.

Intel didn't move away from the Pentium branding until Core came along

Branding has nothing to do with what generation the chips were, unless you believe the original 60MHz Pentium from 1993 and the final Pentium 4 are members of the same generation. Sorry but I don't think so. It's like saying the PS3 is a fifth generation console because it still uses the name Playstation.

They haven't moved away from pentium the lower end E2xx0 i believe core 2 chips are called pentium dual cores i believe.

(Digix said @ #17.2)

They haven't moved away from pentium the lower end E2xx0 i believe core 2 chips are called pentium dual cores i believe.

hell no !

pentium dual cores is core 2 celaron dual core

(Skyfrog said @ #17.1)
Branding has nothing to do with what generation the chips were


My point was that maybe the whole thing is just childishly simple enough to actually be about branding. That was why I said everyone is thinking too deeply into this. Have you never dealt with a marketing team before? Marketers only briefly acknowledge the technical aspects of something to determine whether or not there's a story that can help in selling to the consumer.

If anything, calling the i7 7th generation should cause far less outrage and confusion than Intel's determination to hang onto the Pentium name for so long. Where was the noise when the Pentium 4 came out? Hell, the only reason there wasn't a Pentium 5 was probably because the marketing division realized the redundancy of the name would cause heads to explode.

"A pent- pentium? Yeah, time to go with something new, guys."

Of course, having the logo say "Core inside" is equally silly.

(ChrisJ1968 said @ #12)
I am an AMD user and have mostly been. I do not hate intel at all but, this is confusion!!

great marketing dept Intel!

And AMD hasn't had confusing names?

(ChrisJ1968 said @ #12)
I am an AMD user and have mostly been. I do not hate intel at all but, this is confusion!!

great marketing dept Intel!


And changing their flagship brand from "Athlon" to "Phenom" made total sense, right?

(Airlink said @ #12.3)

And changing their flagship brand from "Athlon" to "Phenom" made total sense, right? :wacko:

X2 , X3 , X4 ???? :confused:

6000+ ?!?! :confused:

(Skynetfuture said @ #12.4)

X2 , X3 , X4 ???? :confused:

6000+ ?!?! :confused:

hmm.. x2= dual core x3= triple core...no that hard to see

6000+...I never understood that for years.

get off my nuts!, Intel won the confusion battle..

For the people complaining this isnt the 7th generation here is how intel lists their generations


4004 - 80286 1st Generation
80386 - 2nd generation
80486 - 3rd generation
80586 - Pentium 3 - 4th generation
Pentium 4/M/D - 5th genreation
Core/Core2 - 6th generation
Nehalem - 7th generation

So basically they have no technical reasons to their generations? Explain to me how this makes sense. The 4004 is not in the same class as the 286, 386 and 486 are very similar, the Pentium 4 and M have nothing in common, the Pentium and Pentium II share nothing in common and the Core/Nehalem are pretty much the same architecture.

Pentium Pro, Pentium II, and Pentium III were similar in architecture and can be considered the 686.

The Pentium 4 and Pentium M are different architectures. The Pentium M was closer to the Pentium III than Pentium 4. It wasn't a netburst based chip and was evolved from the last PIII revision.

Count the number of label changes since Pentium.

0) 486
1) Pentium
2) Pentium II
3) Pentium III
4) Pentium 4
5) Core
6) Core 2
7) i7

Hey, look, the name makes sense now.

(Airlink said @ #11.4)
Count the number of label changes since Pentium.

0) 486
1) Pentium
2) Pentium II
3) Pentium III
4) Pentium 4
5) Core
6) Core 2
7) i7

Hey, look, the name makes sense now. :rolleyes:

Right, it works out great when you just leave off the 8086 through the 80386. Instead of rolling your eyes you should hanging your head in embarrassment.

(TRC said @ #11.3)
That list makes absolutely no sense at all.

I'm sorry but what makes no sense about it? 4004 though 80286 was one "generation" of architecture for intel.... this isn't a new generation for each processor model, its a generation per architecture if you did all intel's procs its a lot more then 11 but those are generations those are products, the instruction sets and designs are what intel considers generations

1. 4004
2. 8080
3. 8086
4. 80186
5. 80286
6. 80368
7. 80486SX
8. 80486DX (yes it was a new design for the chip so im listing it as a new chip
9. 80586 (Pentium)
10. Pentium II
11. Pentium 3
12. Pentium 4
13. Core Solo / Duo
14. Core 2 Duo / Quad
15. Nehalem

so obviously it's not by processor model, its by architecture generation.....

(neufuse said @ #11.6)
so obviously it's not by processor model, its by architecture generation.....

Sort of. Both Intel and AMD seem to disagree about when new x86 generations start.

Intel's naming conventions.

0. 8086
1. 80186
2. 80286
3. 386
4. 486
5. Pentium -Code name "P5" platform. Also, they didn't use the 586 name beause they couldn't copyright it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium
6. Pentium Pro/Pentium II/Celeron/Pentium III/Pentium M/Core -The P6 Platform http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_P6
7. Core i7, apparently.

To make matters even more confusing AMD thinks their 7th generation CPU's started with the Athlon/K7, and the eighth with the Opteron/Athlon64 a.k.a K8.

So basically they are simply ignoring the Pentium 4 in a case of odd historical revisionism. Netburst architecture was considered by Intel to be their 7th generation architecture. This is further backed up by the Pentium Pro-Pentium II-Pentium III being part of the P6 line. I, however, take issue with the Pentium M and Core being part of the P6 line because of significant differences in architecture. It is similar but it is not the same.

0. 8086
1. 80186
2. 80286
3. 80386
4. 80486
5. P5 i.e. Pentium 80586
6. Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Celeron, Pentium III
7. Pentium 4
6. Pentium M, Core Duo and Core 2 Duo (now referred to as 6b)
7. Core i7

"The Pentium 4 brand refers to Intel's line of single-core mainstream desktop and laptop central processing units (CPUs) introduced on November 20, 2000[1] (August 8, 2008 is the date of last shipments of Pentium 4s[2]). They had the 7th-generation architecture, called NetBurst, which was the company's first all-new design since 1995, when the Intel P6 architecture of the Pentium Pro CPUs had been introduced. NetBurst differed from the preceding Intel P6 - of Pentium III, II, etc. - by featuring a very deep instruction pipeline to achieve very high clock speeds[3] (up to 4 GHz) limited only by max. power consumption (TDP) reaching up to 115 W in 3.6–3.8 GHz Prescotts and Prescotts 2M[4] (a high TDP requires an additional cooling that can be noisy or expensive). In 2004, the initial 32-bit x86 instruction set of the Pentium 4 microprocessors was extended by the 64-bit x86-64 set."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentium_4

(bluarash said @ #11.9)
So basically they are simply ignoring the Pentium 4 in a case of odd historical revisionism. Netburst architecture was considered by Intel to be their 7th generation architecture. This is further backed up by the Pentium Pro-Pentium II-Pentium III being part of the P6 line. I, however, take issue with the Pentium M and Core being part of the P6 line because of significant differences in architecture. It is similar but it is not the same.[/url]

Precisely. I believe they refer to Pentium M/Core as P6+.

Not just that, the Core (first not 2) chip belongs with the Pentium 3 line because it was based on the Pentium M.

Lay-Z said,
Pentium Pro, Pentium II, and Pentium III were similar in architecture and can be considered the 686.

The Pentium 4 and Pentium M are different architectures. The Pentium M was closer to the Pentium III than Pentium 4. It wasn't a netburst based chip and was evolved from the last PIII revision.

Should this not either be i8 or i9 or i10? The only way they can claim i7 is to completely disregard the Pentium 4. The original Pentium was a 5th generation architecture. The Pentium Pro and II were sixth generation. This would leave the Pentium 4 to be seventh generation (you could claim that the Prescott was i7b). The same can be said for Core. Core should be i8 and this new processor line should be i8b (its core technology).

Even the Pentium III went through several revisions (Katmai, Coppermine, Tualatin). These logos may turn out to be fake anyway, best to wait and see.

interesting naming .... i wonder how they came up with that? ... (the i part) ... i -intel , 7 generation ... hmm kinda effective in a way but still .... is allright ... i still want the extreme whatever they call it

I, personnaly, dislike the name Core 2 Duo, and I don't think "Nehalem" is very marketable. i7 is just fine to me.

By the way, how can they think of making CPUs with more and more cores when they need software and operating systems to be able to adapt to it? If you ask me its a pretty bad way to make more advanced processors.

(Snafu said @ #4.2)
But is it really the seventh generation? If you count up from the original 8086 it's somewhere around the tenth generation. Wikipedia shows the p4 as the seventh generation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86

Wikipedia is wrong. It's the seventh desktop PC platform since the introduction of the Pentium. Like so:

0) 486
1) Pentium
2) Pentium II
3) Pentium III
4) Pentium 4
5) Core
6) Core 2
7) i7

See? Learning how to count has it's benefits.

(Airlink said @ #4.3)

Wikipedia is wrong. It's the seventh desktop PC platform since the introduction of the Pentium. Like so:

0) 486
1) Pentium
2) Pentium II
3) Pentium III
4) Pentium 4
5) Core
6) Core 2
7) i7

See? Learning how to count has it's benefits.

Why are you starting from the 486? The intel architecture started with the 8086 and every consumer processor after it has been an improvement on that basic architecture.

1. 8086
2. 286
3. 386
4. 486
5. Pentium
6. Pentium II
7. Pentium III
8. Pentium IV
9. Core
10. Core 2
11. i7

If each release is a new generation then where at the 11th. Even if i was based on when 32 bit chips (486) where released we're at the eighth.

(Airlink said @ #4.3)

Wikipedia is wrong. It's the seventh desktop PC platform since the introduction of the Pentium. Like so:

0) 486
1) Pentium
2) Pentium II
3) Pentium III
4) Pentium 4
5) Core
6) Core 2
7) i7

See? Learning how to count has it's benefits.

So does learning what you're talking about, which you apparently don't. As the previous poster asked, why on earth did you start with the 486? Did you forget about the 8086/8088, 80186, 80286 and 80386, or just have no idea they ever existed? Hard to see how since they are right on the wiki page you just supposedly read.

(Skyfrog said @ #4.5)

So does learning what you're talking about, which you apparently don't. As the previous poster asked, why on earth did you start with the 486? Did you forget about the 8086/8088, 80186, 80286 and 80386, or just have no idea they ever existed? Hard to see how since they are right on the wiki page you just supposedly read.


Read The Freeking Article
"The i7 refers to Nehalem as the seventh x86 platform generation to come from Intel."
And, if you'd look at how I numbered them, I numbered 486 as 0 and Pentium as 1. That means I'm starting at Pentium, not at 486.

(Snafu said @ #4.4)
Why are you starting from the 486? The intel architecture started with the 8086 and every consumer processor after it has been an improvement on that basic architecture.

1. 8086
2. 286
3. 386
4. 486
5. Pentium
6. Pentium II
7. Pentium III
8. Pentium IV
9. Core
10. Core 2
11. i7

If each release is a new generation then where at the 11th. Even if i was based on when 32 bit chips (486) where released we're at the eighth.


If you're going to do that, then you have to list every revision of every chip as a new generation.
(Items in italics are upcoming, and not released yet)

(1) Pentium (p5)
(2) Pentium (P54CS)
(3) Pentium MMX
(4) Pentium Pro
(5) Pentium II (Klamath)
(6) Pentium II (Deschutes)
(7) Pentium III (Katmai)
(8) Pentium III (Coppermine)
(9) Pentium III (Coppermine-T)
(8) Pentium III (Tualitin)
(9) Pentium 4 (Willamette)
(10) Pentium 4 (Northwood)
(11) Pentium 4 Extreme Edition (Galatin)
(12) Pentium 4 (Prescott)
(13) Pentium Extreme Edition (Prescot 2M/Irwindale)
(14) Pentium Extreme Edition (Smithfield)
(15) Pentium Extreme Edition (Smithfield XE)
(16) Pentium 4 (Ceader Mill)
(17) Pentium D (Presler)
(18) Pentium D (Presler XE)
(19) Core Sole/Core Duo/Pentium Dual Core (Yonah)
(20) Core 2 Extreme (Conroe XE)
(21) Core 2 Duo (Conroe)
(22) Core 2 Extreme (Kentsfield XE)
(23) Core 2 Duo (Allendale)
(24) Core 2 Quad (Kentsfield)
(25) Core 2 Extreme (Yorkfield XE)
(26) Core 2 Duo (Wolfdale)
(27) Core 2 Quad (Yorkfield)
(28) i7 (Nehalem family)
(29) Westmere
(30) Sandy Bridge
(31) Haswell