Wanted to post this from my other post that was on the incorrect article. Really do not appreciate how confusing and deceptive AMD and NVidia have been lately. Extremely deceptive benchmarks and product labeling. So the new 7000s mobile CPU can be Zen 2 Zen 3 or Zen 4. That is VERY confusing for the consumer that don't even know if they are getting the latest silicon.

Coupe:

Wanted to post this from my other post that was on the incorrect article. Really do not appreciate how confusing and deceptive AMD and NVidia have been lately. Extremely deceptive benchmarks and product labeling. So the new 7000s mobile CPU can be Zen 2 Zen 3 or Zen 4. That is VERY confusing for the consumer that don't even know if they are getting the latest silicon.

This has been going on everywhere from all companies. In the end most consumers only care about performance, not what "generation" something is. If Product A gives them X performance, they don't care if it's F or G generation. If anything, aside from the fact it'll take a little to get use to, the new naming scheme allows anyone who DOES care, to know what they are getting without having to research a ton of stuff. Not to mention the fact that only 7030 series (Zen3)"might" and 7035 series might be a "rebrand" as all other (Zen2, Zen4) run on DDR5, has definitely not been a thing on Zen 2 As well, Zen 2 was never on 6nm, but is now, nor did it have RDNA graphics, only had vega So again, unless you're just caring about "words" on a product, something being zen 2, 3, 3+, 4, etc. all of that doesn't matter when it comes to what actually matters: Performance, and if a Zen 2 CPU had 10% less performance then a Zen 4 CPU, and everything else as equal, but it costs less, in the end, in reality, to the consumer, to literally any realistic position, does the name of the architecture matter? Because if the answer is yes, that needs some serious explaining and very likely priorities need to be figured out.