I like your disclaimer at the end. You know exactly what the M stands for but can't talk about it because it wasn't also leaked.
It's Intel's way of squeaking out a little more cash from those very high end configs where the 2/4P ends up being a very low percentage of the overall cost.
I'm guessing that Intel wants to do two things: 1. Justify outrageous prices with a "touch of elegance and sophistication that only gold and platinum can provide" 2. Distance their Xeon naming as far away as possible from consumer i3/i5/i7 naming. After Ryzen shattered the performance/dollar ratio, they rightly anticipate Naples to do the same.
Right now that wouldn't surprise me. I think Intel has lost the plot. Why change an understood naming scheme for something that's a) a mouthful b) tacky? Have they forgotten these are bought by professionals?
Frankly the quality of reporting about Intel's upcoming product line from this website has been sub-par. That especially includes the rather bizzarre and factually unsupported statements that Cutress put into official articles about how the next-generation Xeons can't do more than 40 lanes of PCIe when Intel's own slides show that they not only exceed 40 lanes but the higher-end chips have a 48 lane PCIe implementation that has 16/8/4 lane bifurcation, which is a great feature.
Actually, this article is an improvement. In the beginning, Mr. Cutress did not separate facts from his personal speculation at all. Now he does. In the beginning, whenever he was wrong, he would perpetuate mistakes that had been pointed out before across articles, now he does not. I think we can now hope that the last step of improvement - actually admitting to mistakes and publishing corrections - will come soon, and we will finally again be able to trust Anandtech articles.
So you think Intel wanted to announce its next range of high-profit enterprise CPUs in an obscure technical document about an arrow on the heatspreader? One which doesn't seem to appear on the PCN list anymore?
Quite likely Silver would be used next for those CPUs below Gold. This feels very WDC with the colour/precious metals similarity. It will definitely get funny that these levels have to scale beyond this release up and down. I was to see Xeon Diamond!
Seriously...lol this is so stupid their marketing department needs to be fired. Intel doesn't even need a CPU marketing department, everyone already knows what's what.
Changing names and product categories seems to be a way of the marketing debt guaranteeing their survival.
I really don't think the names of server CPUs matter at all. It's not like a consumer product, which someone might be swayed into buying a more expensive chip because "it needs to be an i7", like the hilariously named -U mobile chips that are all slower than an -H series mobile i3.
Although I really can't complain the names are worse than the previous ones. This is the same company that kept the exact same CPU names for ages and just changed the version number at the end. That naming scheme was totally asinine.
Not sure about the new naming scheme. E5 or E7 series was a choice between cost, performance, core count, cache size, multi-processor scalability, etc.
Calling it gold/platinum is a very cheesy way to artificially inflate the "premiumness" of the product without changing it at a core level. All this really does is entice higher management into saying YES to procuring a "platinum" level processor over "gold" level processor. Non-tech-savvy management wouldn't otherwise care between E5 and E7 and should (in most cases) rightfully pick the more cost-effective solution.
I preferred the E5/E7 differentiation, as it was analagous to the consumer i5/i7 branding, but E would stand for Enterprise or something, I guess.
No, you've got it exactly wrong. This is going to BACK FIRE!! IT departments will get told by accounting & various MBAs: "Gee, I don't think we really need platinum. Let's go with Silver."
When it was an obscure product code and some features they didn't understand, they kept their mouths shut, not wanting to appear ignorant. But EVERYBODY knows precious metals.
Intel should've used the precious metals names on ignorant consumers, and kept the quasi-meaningful product codes for the market segment that makes their purchasing decisions based on rational understanding of the products.
OMG Intel what are you doing really Gold and Platinum naming? I guess they figure it makes them sound more important so they will charge even more for these parts. Where is Silver and Bronze? lol
bleh... I consider e5/e7 naming being much better... Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum sounds like a pair of cheap sl.. I mean... escorts. Definitely not like a thing I'd go with to a manager to sign order for.
Even in consumer space these (rare) metal brands are so so.
I think it is safe to assume that bigger numbers still mean "better" for some definition of better; and based on the table above, I suspect Intel has redefined what "better" means. Based on the clock speeds and TDP of the old Xeon E5 lineup, I suspect that the Gold 6152 is the E5-2699, and the Gold 6154 is the old E5-2687W. I agree that the meaning of "T" probably hasn't changed, but I really doubt that "M" means MCDRAM. If it did, then the high end parts would have it.
Is anyone other than me sad at the apparently demise of the 1S E5 Xeons? I would love a single-socket 8-core at 3-3.5GHz on the Purley platform, but I haven't seen a single mention of anything under 2 sockets. I suppose I can settle for a single lower-clocked 8-core but I will never buy a second one, for either a workstation or server. I realize I'm probably in a niche market segment here, but is a high-clock workstation processor with 8 cores for under $1000 really too much to ask? Wait, this is Intel we're talking to here... so yeah, it probably is too much to ask.
Wow. Maybe Intel hired some Trump relative in their marketing dept. to gain favor with the Whitehouse? Because that's the most logical explanation I can possibly imagine for this ghastly absurdity.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
32 Comments
Back to Article
Eden-K121D - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
First!VoraciousGorak - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Cool, here's your internet point.Casper42 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
I like your disclaimer at the end.You know exactly what the M stands for but can't talk about it because it wasn't also leaked.
It's Intel's way of squeaking out a little more cash from those very high end configs where the 2/4P ends up being a very low percentage of the overall cost.
M stands for More Expensive :)
nathanddrews - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
I'm guessing that Intel wants to do two things:1. Justify outrageous prices with a "touch of elegance and sophistication that only gold and platinum can provide"
2. Distance their Xeon naming as far away as possible from consumer i3/i5/i7 naming. After Ryzen shattered the performance/dollar ratio, they rightly anticipate Naples to do the same.
name99 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Come on, it's obvious. They are copying Apple with gold iPhones.Next year I expect Intel to be selling Rose Gold Kabe Lake Xeons!
GhostOfAnand - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
I'm holding out for Xeon Rose Gold.Meteor2 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Right now that wouldn't surprise me. I think Intel has lost the plot. Why change an understood naming scheme for something that's a) a mouthful b) tacky? Have they forgotten these are bought by professionals?CajunArson - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Wait, why does an official Intel document listed on its own website (and is still there, BTW, it's easy to find http://qdms.intel.com/dm/i.aspx/645B281A-2F68-4DB1... ) count as an "accidental" disclosure?Frankly the quality of reporting about Intel's upcoming product line from this website has been sub-par. That especially includes the rather bizzarre and factually unsupported statements that Cutress put into official articles about how the next-generation Xeons can't do more than 40 lanes of PCIe when Intel's own slides show that they not only exceed 40 lanes but the higher-end chips have a 48 lane PCIe implementation that has 16/8/4 lane bifurcation, which is a great feature.
KaarlisK - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Actually, this article is an improvement. In the beginning, Mr. Cutress did not separate facts from his personal speculation at all. Now he does. In the beginning, whenever he was wrong, he would perpetuate mistakes that had been pointed out before across articles, now he does not. I think we can now hope that the last step of improvement - actually admitting to mistakes and publishing corrections - will come soon, and we will finally again be able to trust Anandtech articles.Cygni - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
So you think Intel wanted to announce its next range of high-profit enterprise CPUs in an obscure technical document about an arrow on the heatspreader? One which doesn't seem to appear on the PCN list anymore?Who hurt you?
willis936 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
*audible smack of hand on foreheadcolinstu - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
So are Xeon E3 going to become "Xeon Silver"? lolcreed3020 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Quite likely Silver would be used next for those CPUs below Gold. This feels very WDC with the colour/precious metals similarity. It will definitely get funny that these levels have to scale beyond this release up and down. I was to see Xeon Diamond!MrSpadge - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Waiting for Xeon Xenon, personally.Samus - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Seriously...lol this is so stupid their marketing department needs to be fired. Intel doesn't even need a CPU marketing department, everyone already knows what's what.Changing names and product categories seems to be a way of the marketing debt guaranteeing their survival.
johnp_ - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
IIRC "E3 v7" should become "Xeon Bronze" 3000 Series with <10 Cores on LGA-2066Flunk - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
I really don't think the names of server CPUs matter at all. It's not like a consumer product, which someone might be swayed into buying a more expensive chip because "it needs to be an i7", like the hilariously named -U mobile chips that are all slower than an -H series mobile i3.Although I really can't complain the names are worse than the previous ones. This is the same company that kept the exact same CPU names for ages and just changed the version number at the end. That naming scheme was totally asinine.
Meteor2 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Yeah, but it also made perfect sense.JoeyJoJo123 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Not sure about the new naming scheme. E5 or E7 series was a choice between cost, performance, core count, cache size, multi-processor scalability, etc.Calling it gold/platinum is a very cheesy way to artificially inflate the "premiumness" of the product without changing it at a core level. All this really does is entice higher management into saying YES to procuring a "platinum" level processor over "gold" level processor. Non-tech-savvy management wouldn't otherwise care between E5 and E7 and should (in most cases) rightfully pick the more cost-effective solution.
I preferred the E5/E7 differentiation, as it was analagous to the consumer i5/i7 branding, but E would stand for Enterprise or something, I guess.
mode_13h - Sunday, April 30, 2017 - link
No, you've got it exactly wrong. This is going to BACK FIRE!! IT departments will get told by accounting & various MBAs: "Gee, I don't think we really need platinum. Let's go with Silver."When it was an obscure product code and some features they didn't understand, they kept their mouths shut, not wanting to appear ignorant. But EVERYBODY knows precious metals.
Intel should've used the precious metals names on ignorant consumers, and kept the quasi-meaningful product codes for the market segment that makes their purchasing decisions based on rational understanding of the products.
Glock24 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Seems like a way to distract the target audience so they don't compare it directly to the upcoming Naples using the old E3/E5/E7Glock24 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
Missing the word "nomenclature".Is there no way to edit comments?
rocky12345 - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
OMG Intel what are you doing really Gold and Platinum naming? I guess they figure it makes them sound more important so they will charge even more for these parts. Where is Silver and Bronze? lolMrSpadge - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
The new naming scheme accounts for the rising production costs of chips, making them worth their weight in precious metals.. or a lot more, actually.HollyDOL - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
bleh... I consider e5/e7 naming being much better... Xeon Gold and Xeon Platinum sounds like a pair of cheap sl.. I mean... escorts. Definitely not like a thing I'd go with to a manager to sign order for.Even in consumer space these (rare) metal brands are so so.
allenb - Thursday, April 27, 2017 - link
I love CPUs named after gentlemen's clubs!Elstar - Friday, April 28, 2017 - link
I think it is safe to assume that bigger numbers still mean "better" for some definition of better; and based on the table above, I suspect Intel has redefined what "better" means. Based on the clock speeds and TDP of the old Xeon E5 lineup, I suspect that the Gold 6152 is the E5-2699, and the Gold 6154 is the old E5-2687W. I agree that the meaning of "T" probably hasn't changed, but I really doubt that "M" means MCDRAM. If it did, then the high end parts would have it.yokken - Friday, April 28, 2017 - link
Is anyone other than me sad at the apparently demise of the 1S E5 Xeons? I would love a single-socket 8-core at 3-3.5GHz on the Purley platform, but I haven't seen a single mention of anything under 2 sockets. I suppose I can settle for a single lower-clocked 8-core but I will never buy a second one, for either a workstation or server. I realize I'm probably in a niche market segment here, but is a high-clock workstation processor with 8 cores for under $1000 really too much to ask? Wait, this is Intel we're talking to here... so yeah, it probably is too much to ask.mode_13h - Sunday, April 30, 2017 - link
Are. You. Kidding. ???Checking date... nope. Not April 1st.
Wow. Maybe Intel hired some Trump relative in their marketing dept. to gain favor with the Whitehouse? Because that's the most logical explanation I can possibly imagine for this ghastly absurdity.
mode_13h - Sunday, April 30, 2017 - link
BTW, anyone notice how this article got deleted?http://www.anandtech.com/show/11277/upcoming-lga36...
No explanation. It's just gone.
helvete - Friday, July 14, 2017 - link
Right. Found a link in RSS feed and no article on the site whatsoever. It can be read for example here http://technewsport.com/apps/upcoming-lga3647-skyl... thoughKickedAbyss - Tuesday, July 11, 2017 - link
Ark has them listed with core counts and such. M seems to stand for more memory. 1.5tb vs 768 in example.