Core Truths: Intel's Unbelievable Series of Own Goals

Intel's core truths Playbook is a very strange marketing campaign that attempts to make AMD look bad by accusing them of all the things that Intel's already doing it's bizarre and it's probably why they took it down again almost instantly the video cards managed to make copies of them which I'll link to in this video's description for you to see for yourselves Gamers Nexus has already covered this topic but I don't think even his video fully explains quite how many own goals Intel has scored with these slides it's honestly incredible how bad it manages to make them look core truth number one mentions their competitors ryzen 5 7520 U is built on dated Zen 2 architecture released in 2019 which they repeating capital letters on the following page this is factually correct amd's new 7,000 lineup of mobile processors does contain some products with architectures from up to 4 years ago and it isn't something that anyone's happy with but it's Brave of Intel to call them out for doing this when they did exactly this for 5 years their Skylake architecture first came out in 2015 with their 6,000 series and lasted through till the 10,000 series granted in this time clock speeds got higher core counts got greater minor tweaks were made under the hood but deep down it was still based on the same 40 nanm Sky Lake as Intel had been using for years already but all of Intel's rebranding is in the past it must be because otherwise calling out their competitor for doing it would be doubly stupid wouldn't it oh wait Intel is still doing it the latest 14,000 series of processors is mostly just a Rebrand of the 13,000 series from last year which itself is just the 12,000 series with minor tweaks and more ecores so Intel's still doing what they accusing AMD of doing only unlike AMD Intel has no newer architecture to use instead until next week Z is new technology rebranded in Intel's case they like to release a lineup of processors with a new name every year but are unable to make something new each year hence the refreshing of older products which has allowed Intel to release 13 different series of core processes in the last 13 years this is probably done because it looks good for there to be a new product named to distinguish a laptop available today from one being sold a year ago even if under the hood they're essentially the same thing so I think the amd's new and misleading naming system is them wanting to do kind of the same thing they even say it themselves the 7,000 series is for 2023 the 8,000 series is for 2024 and so on that excuse doesn't stop their naming scheme from being grossly misleading though with no fewer than three different architectures making their way into the 7,000 series I suspect this was done because old technology is cheaper and thus fulfills the low end and reserves their latest and greatest products for the more premium price points AMD wants to have their cake and eat it and it's good they've been called out on that but in are the wrong ones to do that because they've been doing the same thing which gets us onto core truth to which is a very similar point with Intel accusing AMD of reusing older architectures only this core truth is focused around how they hide it in plain sight and all it consists of is one of amd's slides and I don't really get the point in them saying this because at least it's showing that AMD has the decency to show it in the name somewhere which is another spectacular Intel own goal because Intel doesn't bother showing rebrands in their naming scheme the Intel 13400 13500 and even the 13600 come to mind they sound like they're from the 13,000 series yet unlike the 13600 K and those above it they don't have the same increased cash amounts that actually helped the 13,000 series to be marginally better than the 12,000 series was and unlike amd's naming scheme there's no way of you knowing that these Intel processors are cut down in this way besides there being a lower number in the name even people who follow the processor scene might just imagine this means that they don't overclock as far or whatever but no they are being cut down in other more meaningful ways which you'd at least have been warned about if intel bothered to use some of those zeros in their products names to actually mean something it's not specifically mentioned in these slides but I think this campaign is only talking about mobile processes but that's still a very flimsy defense core truth number three is just weird the sort of weird where it might not be wrong but it's still a weird point to try and get across and it's weird that nobody involved with making these slides ever stop to think how weird it would sound for this point they choose to focus on education and to say how learning depends on having the latest technology or something now you might think this is a desperate think of the children kind of Playa as though AMD reusing old architectures is harming the kids of today and it turns out it is exactly that look in the next slide here's a child and I guess it's showing that she could be getting better education if she was using Intel instead of a rebranded AMD processor especially if she's using the lens effect in Photoshop or converting MP3 to MIDI like all the cool kids are doing these days so this slide is probably all factually correct but doesn't stop it from Simply being weird and oddly specific and the next slide gets even more interesting someone somewhere is proud of themselves for cramming so much information into a single diagram but they never stop to ask if they should let's start with the simple if it was just this then they could at least have aligned everything properly as it is it looks horrible and no way can this be a finalized slide that Intel would approve to show to the world now we'll extend it out to here which I guess attempts to show the tasks that each tier of processor opens up it doesn't quite work like that but okay a few of these are ranked questionably but none as much as Esports being reserved for the core I9 processor at the top when orts games would benefit less from I9 levels of multitasking than most of the others on this list and last we'll open up the rest of the slide which attempts to group these tiers of processors by age and try as I might I can't actually see anything glaringly wrong with what's being implied here but it doesn't stop it from being weird to associate processor teers with ages instead of with requirements Intel's new meteor Lake processors are set to be released next week so you'd think these slides would be here to promote that yet the campaign seems far more focused on attacking AMD instead it's a baffling and childish marketing attempt from a company worth billions and I'm not sure who it's trying to impress though it certainly has gained a lot of publicity the final core truth is that not all cores give you the best overall performance which I honestly took as Intel directly criticizing their own eour for being slower than their peor but it's not trying to say that it's trying to hammer home that different tiers of AMD processor use different architectures and are beaten by competing Intel processors and indeed not all cores are equal cuz it shows Intel's 8 core n305 outperforming amd's four core processor by just 9% that would have been a lot more impressive had you not spent this entire presentation ragging on how bad Zen 2 is also the fact that this was all done in Crossmark which I have to admit I had never heard of before this presentation as per Intel's appendices this is a benchmark from the bapco Consortium which and this is how Thor I research stuff work Wikipedia notes as having bias in its benchmarking products and back in 2002 intel was the sole contributor to a series of CPU tests which heavily favored their CPUs oh dear but that was 20 years ago intel was fine for doing that and I'm sure they wouldn't still be doing the same underhand methods to gain an advantage now surely but it still makes Crossmark a rather tainted Benchmark for them to use to slag off their competition out of curiosity I tried finding the Benchmark results they had used on bapco site which was a challenge cuz the site is dog regularly freezing going blank and requiring reloading and the filters are deeply flawed no wonder nobody uses Crossmark eventually though I weeded out these results on the dates and the computer specs highlighted in the appendix it seems they actually did test the two processors themselves on the same day back in May on very similar systems and they were very fair about the results that they ended up using the AMD processor had six documented results the Intel seven half of amd's results were significantly lower while Intel weren't which I wonder if it could have been them testing without multi-threading on or something like that which would impact the AMD product more than the 10 core Intel one it's all very interesting trying to establish what exactly they decided to test here but to call truth's defense none of this matters because it seems they heard on the side of caution and on the slides put these two processes as equals despite the Intel product generally outperforming the amd1 on cross mark site so this is the one positive thing I can say about the slides they don't appear to have been intentionally naughty with the benchmarking results Intel's core truth campaign raises more questions than answers what was Intel trying to achieve with this who was going to be convinced by these core truths that they've made who signed this off as being a good idea how did they manage to make themselves look so bad so many times and who actually made these slides the wording is sloppy and amateurish it's full of rambling sentences caps locked words exclamation marks and quotation marks around everything this sort of stuff is really damaging to their reputation it just boggles my mind this presentation represents Intel and I'm embarrassed for them if what the competition's doing is so terrible then you think it would just make it easier for Intel to make their own products look good but by focusing on AMD like this it stinks of desperation it gives everyone the impression that Intel has to resort to dirty tactics because they can't win by normal means you probably know of user Benchmark already if not it looks like a hardware benchmarking site but it absolutely hates AMD and it Rags on them in every product summary not just the ones about AMD even on other bits of Hardware it will hastily get the summary of the product out of the way and then use the rest of the available space to run about am again particularly in recent years the site has become a ridiculous Meme and a place not to be trusted for obvious reasons no one knows who runs the site which opens the door to all sorts of fun but wild conspiracy driven speculation like the idea that the site might be funded by Intel because it's so anti- AMD to which I look at and think nah that can't be the case it would just be too blatant if intel was in some way involved with the insane ramblings that are on user Benchmark site a billion dollar Corporation should be Beyond such Petty and childish tactics so when they release something as Petty and as childish as their core truths campaign they don't help themselves and only fuel such crazy speculation even I had Deja V when looking through these slides spotting things written in a way I would have expected to have seen on a user Benchmark summary page sure enough in the ryzen 7600 summary user Benchmark says buying new AMD products is like buying used cars it takes time experience and a taste for sales hype and then in these slides Intel lyans to a used car salesman what is going on here Intel why are you imitating user Benchmark at least they don't get their benchmarks from user Benchmark that site believes a 16 core Ryon is only 2% faster than an 8 core version no Intel is using Crossmark which thinks it's 5% slower let's end with something constructive how could Intel have improved this core truth's marketing material simple by not releasing it

Channel: 2kliksphilip

Views: 96,348

Keywords: 2kliksphilip, game, 3kliksphilip, review, nostalgia, tech

Id: 05RGUtSk3P0

Length: 10min 25sec (625 seconds)

Published: Fri Dec 08 2023