Instead, Intel decided to go with an incomprehensible system of naming: Pentium Overdrive, Pentium MMX, Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Pentium III, Pentium III Xeon, Pentium D, Pentium M, Pentium Extreme Edition, etc. Good luck trying to figure out the ordering of these processors.
I hear things like "What do you mean it's slow? It's an i7!" or "It can't be slow -- it's a Xeon!" from too many people in the wild.
To them, the first number is the important one. What they see is that it is still an i7 and therefore they think it must be still be (relatively) fast, even if their second-gen i7-2600 is demonstrably pretty slow.
I tried once to explain how Intel's numbering system has worked to a friend. I failed pretty miserably. I even used a whiteboard. I couldn't convey what needed to be conveyed in order to explain why his computer (an i7) wasn't keeping up with the tasks he gave to it.
But I can convey the problem simply enough in this crowd, here on HNN: What's faster, a "Core i3-9100" or a "Core i7-2600"?
(At least with 286, 386, 486, and Pentium, the nomenclature was much more digestible.)
One has 4 threads, the other has 8; and the difference between 6 generations is actually not that big, especially if you start talking about overclocking, cooling, and thermal throttling.
At least with 286, 386, 486, and Pentium, the nomenclature was much more digestible
Those were all single-core, but still, you could ask "what's faster, a 486SX-16 or a 386DX-33?" (The answer may surprise you. Sorry, couldn't resist...):
https://dependency-injection.com/the-slowest-486-vs-fastest-...