I can definately support this. Both intel and amd are confusing in mobile segment. It was complete bs when you could buy an i7 mobile chip but it was just a dual core with hyperthreading.

Yeah, I'd say this is a good change. Of course when I was buying a new laptop last year, I carefully googled all the specs, so in that sense I got no surprises. However, it doesn't hurt if things are simpler to figure out. It helps when you are, for example, talking about laptops with someone or perhaps visiting a store with a friend, and thus don't have time to google every single CPU to see what it really is.

closely resembles the epyc naming scheme, good change imo.

It`s better than before but still confusing. For regular folks, this will continue to be a complete mystery...

I like how deeply they explained each number. This actually makes sense because you can logically break down the number within a few seconds if you care to memorize things, not that you need to, you just need to pay attention to certain numbers when looking. Also the average consumer isn't going to know, which is why it's more important than ever to offer meaningful advice to those who aren't in the know.

H83:

It`s better than before but still confusing. For regular folks, this will continue to be a complete mystery...

That becomes their fault in the end. Ignorance is only the persons fault.

I'd say this is an improvement but still over-complicated. Ditch the first digit and just have a literal model year. That way, you don't get some awkwardly big number like Intel. The 3rd digit is redundant so long as there is a natural progression of everything else. If there isn't one, is it really a different marketable product? With self-overclocking CPUs, the 4th digit is relatively meaningless. All chips can simply be made as fast as cooling or power delivery will allow. When it comes to laptops in particular, OEMs can pre-configure this. There is no digit that really explains the GPU, which now matters where it seems AMD will now be offering a wider variety. If there is no GPU, just put a 0. The last character can just simply be a modifier describing whether it is workstation, tuned for efficiency, high-end laptop, Chromebook, etc., making it usable across all of AMD's markets. So the cleaner solution would be something like: 2022 Ryzen 63U (or just '22 63U for short). But hey, I'm just some random jerk on the internet, what do I know?

I have no idea why would anyone support this idea. It is literally a scam. AMD wants to sell people their old products as new. Most people do not follow what is going on with PC components and this type of shenanigans should not be allowed. If AMD wanted to make it clear what CPU people are buying, they would not mix old and new CPUs...

schmidtbag:

I'd say this is an improvement but still over-complicated. Ditch the first digit and just have a literal model year. That way, you don't get some awkwardly big number like Intel. The 3rd digit is redundant so long as there is a natural progression of everything else. If there isn't one, is it really a different marketable product? With self-overclocking CPUs, the 4th digit is relatively meaningless. All chips can simply be made as fast as cooling or power delivery will allow. When it comes to laptops in particular, OEMs can pre-configure this. There is no digit that really explains the GPU, which now matters where it seems AMD will now be offering a wider variety. If there is no GPU, just put a 0. The last character can just simply be a modifier describing whether it is workstation, tuned for efficiency, high-end laptop, Chromebook, etc., making it usable across all of AMD's markets. So the cleaner solution would be something like: 2022 Ryzen 63U (or just '22 63U for short). But hey, I'm just some random jerk on the internet, what do I know?

I like using the year to identify different products but companies don`t like it, because it becomes to easy to spot older products... And then it becomes harder to fool their customers.