Naming products can be a "simple or difficult" task.
For a startup that is more of a "shoot and switch lanes" type, considering that the lifespan of the entire company may not even match the longevity of their first product, giving a product a somewhat random name might not be a big issue. However, for brands that steadily grow each year and release a large number of products, designing a scientific product model standard that allows users to immediately distinguish the category, positioning, model, and iteration relationship of the product has become quite a complex issue.
Image Source: Intel
As a hotspot for the "chaotic evil naming convention," the way PC products are named can be described as "too many to count." Even brands like NVIDIA, known for making it easy for users to spend money, have come up with names like RTX 4070Ti SUPER, a real head-scratcher. When it comes to Intel and AMD, their product naming schemes are even more complex:
In the 10th Gen Intel Core mobile platform, Intel names processors on low-voltage platforms based on the number of Iris integrated graphics execution units (EUs), resulting in product names like "1165G7" that are distinct from both desktop and high-performance mobile platforms. While this approach may confuse consumers regarding the specific configurations of i5 and i7 with Iris EUs, it at least provides consumers with a basis for comparison.
AMD, on the other hand, takes a different approach:
Initially, when Ryzen was first introduced, AMD used a naming system that included Ryzen + tier (one digit) + generation (one digit) + product number (three digits) + suffix (X/G), as seen in the well-known Ryzen R7-2700X and Ryzen R5 2400G. However, as the architecture behind Ryzen became more complex (Zen2/Zen3/Zen3+/Zen4/Zen5), AMD introduced a new naming method, switching to Ryzen + tier (one digit) + year (one digit) + tier (one digit) + architecture (one digit) + feature (one digit) + a letter suffix indicating TDP (e/C/U/HS/HX).
Image Source: AMD
The naming approach that complicates simple questions shatters the long-standing user comparison of "bigger is better," even surpassing cases where products with smaller numbers are actually more powerful. Against the backdrop of Intel restructuring its mobile platform product line next door, AMD's brand strategy of going all-in can be considered quite rare.
However, recent news suggests that AMD seems to have "seen the light."
Simpler names bring more confusion
Recently, the configuration page of the Asus Vivobook S 16 series laptops was accidentally exposed. Although it was quickly taken down, eagle-eyed netizens still found a key part: the computer is equipped with a new processor from AMD with a completely new naming system that has not been released yet - the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 170.
Clearly, AMD seems to be trying to replicate Intel's Ultra route, using a dedicated product line to highlight AMD's capabilities in AI: AMD Ryzen AI is roughly equivalent to "Intel Core Ultra," but when it comes to the 9 HX 170, further discussion is needed.
The numbers are straightforward, and it is expected to continue the product positioning of Ryzen 3/5/7/9. AI 9 is naturally a relatively high-end product among them. Considering that AMD has used the HX suffix in the past, here the HX likely represents the highest TDP designation.
Image Source: ASUS
The issue lies with this "170." Based on current information, Xiaolei believes that the "1" in this 170 should be a product generation or year marker, with next year's new products starting with a "2." As for the following "70," if it represents specific computing power, then when it surpasses three digits in the future, chip names may return to the complex four-digit era, such as AI 9 HX 3125. In comparison, I believe the "70" is simply another product series number, similar to the second digit (1/2/3/4/5/6/7/8) in the AMD 2023 series number, with the last digit indicating product positioning (0/5).
However, this raises another question: AMD often introduces different processes within the same product generation, yet this "new" naming convention does not indicate the position of the manufacturing process. In this light, this new AI numbering system may not even be as clear as the past "7640U" numbering system. Moreover, this is only the naming convention for Ryzen's "mainline." According to leaked Lenovo product introduction pages, commercial products still retain the Ryzen PRO 8040/8050 naming system, leading to a somewhat chaotic situation.
Image Source: Lenovo
In other words, AMD has only completed the task of "renaming," while the task of "simplifying and making product names easier to understand" is not within AMD's consideration.
It's not just about the name change.
However, from a practical and economic perspective, AMD's brand upgrade this time does make sense. For users who pursue computer performance, they can easily understand the relationship between products like "7950," "7640U," and "PRO 8040," so the brand upgrade may not mean much to them. But for the average consumer, simplified identifiers like AI 3/5/7/9 can significantly reduce the barrier for novice users in selecting Ryzen processors. Moreover, starting anew from the first generation also aligns with the future development direction of Intel Core.
Furthermore, AMD also urgently needs to associate with the concept of AI.
In terms of pure gaming performance, AMD processors have already achieved significant accomplishments in multi-core performance, energy efficiency, and integrated GPU performance. However, with the explosive growth of AI and machine learning applications, the competition in the processor market is no longer just about hardware performance but also about whether they can provide optimization and support for AI applications.
Source: AMD
Despite AMD's significant achievements in the processor market, the company faces some clear shortcomings in the field of AI. Firstly, compared to its competitor NVIDIA, AMD has invested less in dedicated hardware and software ecosystems for AI and machine learning. NVIDIA's CUDA platform provides powerful AI computing support for its GPUs, while AMD has yet to introduce a comprehensive solution that can rival it. Additionally, while AMD's GPUs perform well in gaming and general graphics tasks, they often lag behind NVIDIA's specialized AI hardware in deep learning and complex machine learning algorithm computations.
Secondly, AMD's performance in marketing and partnerships lags behind that of Intel and NVIDIA. These two companies have established a strong presence in the AI field through extensive partnerships and market strategies. While AMD has started collaborating with some tech giants, such as Google Cloud, its overall penetration and influence in the AI market remain insufficient.
By introducing AI branding, AMD undoubtedly aims to strengthen consumer awareness of its products' capabilities in this field.
However, the changes in branding and naming strategy are just the first step. AMD needs more than just a name change; it needs to further drive technological innovation to optimize processor architecture, enhance AI computing efficiency, and ensure its products can meet the growing demand for AI computing.
Image Source: AMD
In addition, AMD also needs to leverage its "third-party ecosystem" to collaborate with AI and gaming industries, providing a fertile ground for AI capabilities under the AMD architecture, so that AMD users do not miss out on revolutionary AI applications just because of the recommendation to use NVIDIA graphics cards.
Ultimately, AMD's goal is not only to maintain competitiveness in the processor market but also to become a leader in the field of AI technology. This change in naming strategy not only redefines its products but also redefines AMD's identity as a technology innovator. In the future, as AI technology continues to advance, the success of AMD's strategy will directly impact its position in the global semiconductor market and its future development direction.
Undoubtedly, AMD's change is a proactive response to market changes and a demonstration of seeking new growth points in global technological competition. Only by continuously adapting to market changes can one ensure not being left behind in future technological waves, and this move by AMD is preparing for future competition.
