[bfrog]

No one really does a nice job of this, once the marketing department gets hold its all "super/ultra/maximum/titanium/silver/gold/plantinum/diamond" etc

These words have lost all meaning. No its not just Intel, its literally every single consumer cpu and gpu maker.

[corbulo]

The tech hardware industry generally has terrible marketing. Look at laptop SKUs. None of them are effective at delineating product tiers in an easy to understand way. Even Apple post-Jobs is bad at this: wtf is an air vs pro vs just 'mac' or 'macbook'? What in the hell is an ultra max?

As someone who keeps tabs on the products I can pretty quickly get an intuition for what they mean, but the semantics do no favors. They're just placeholders for 'better' and 'best' when used in various combinations. But once you stop labeling the base model (such as plainly 'Macbook') you're not qualifying what the marketing term is trying to convey (what is it 'better' than?). 'Air' as opposed to...? 'Pro' compared to...a product you no longer sell? 'Ultra' or 'Plus' for phones but 'Pro' for desktop OSs?

If you tried to chart out the marketing terms used in the tech hardware industry it would look like the Always Sunny Charlie Conspiracy meme.

[abudabi123]

Associate each product with three names targeting the market segment that is classy:tea, classless:water, crass:fizzypop-zerosugar. The regulator should assign a grid coordinate for the product to locate its absolute/relative performance. ARM seems to have a meaningful naming scheme a:application, r:i-forget, m:mobile.