Why Are PC Hardware Naming Schemes So Confusing?

What prevents companies from employing straightforward naming conventions?

Image: Shutterstock

Upon entering a store or perusing online for PC components, the multitude of models, series, and specifications can be daunting. Designations such as "RTX 4080 Ti," "Core i7-13700K," or "Ryzen 9 7900X" may appear formidable, yet they frequently induce confusion. Why are companies unable to employ straightforward naming conventions?

Excessive Technical Specifications to Emphasize

The primary reason for the confusion around PC hardware nomenclature is the multitude of technical parameters that manufacturers seek to emphasize. Contemporary CPUs, GPUs, and additional components are equipped with attributes such as core counts, clock speeds, cache sizes, and thermal designs, among others. Manufacturers endeavor to encapsulate all this inside a moniker, although space is limited.

Consider AMD's "Ryzen 5 7640U". The term "Ryzen 5" signifies its position inside AMD's CPU hierarchy. The initial digit, "7," denotes the portfolio model year. Subsequently, assign a "6" to the market sector, a "4" to architecture, a "0" to feature isolation, and a "U" to denote the TDP of the specific CPU. Every component of the name conveys information; but, without familiarity with the coding scheme, one may easily become disoriented.

This endeavor to consolidate information frequently yields names resembling arbitrary sequences of letters and digits. Although enthusiasts may value the intricacies, casual purchasers can perceive it as more perplexing than beneficial.

Attempting to Align with Competitors

Competition within the PC hardware sector is intense, prompting manufacturers to modify their naming conventions to align with or surpass their competitors.

NVIDIA and AMD are the two predominant entities in the graphics card market. When NVIDIA launches a new "RTX" series graphics card, AMD often counters with a new "Radeon RX" graphics card. Each corporation employs distinct naming practices that may significantly differ from one another. In their pursuit of competition, they may generate names that prioritize marketing over clarity.

Compounding the issue, both firms may launch devices with ostensibly analogous designations, such as the "RTX 3080" and the "Radeon RX 6800 XT," prompting widespread curiosity regarding their comparative performance. Companies often establish naming conventions that emphasize market positioning at the expense of customer clarity in order to maintain competitiveness.

Inadequate Scalability in Obsolete Naming Conventions

A further element exacerbating the problem is the scalability of old name conventions—or, more accurately, their lack thereof. When corporations such as Intel or AMD launch new product generations, they frequently endeavor to retain consistency with prior naming practices. Nonetheless, as technology advances, these antiquated systems may begin to deteriorate.

Consider the instance of Intel's central processing units once more. Years ago, the "Core" series commenced with straightforward nomenclature such as "i3," "i5," and "i7," which were rather comprehensible. As additional generations were introduced, the nomenclature evolved to incorporate digits, letters, and suffixes to denote aspects such as generation, power efficiency, and overclocking potential.

Consequently, what began as a simple nomenclature system has evolved into a convoluted array of codes that can be challenging to traverse, particularly for those who do not stay abreast of each generation's modifications.

Product Distinction

Manufacturers employ nomenclature systems to establish distinct boundaries among various items. They aim to convey, at a glance, the categorization of products as budget-friendly, mid-range, or high-end. Nonetheless, in their efforts to establish these distinctions, they may occasionally confuse matters unnecessarily.

Let us examine the instance of AMD's Ryzen CPUs. AMD has a four-tier classification scheme to distinguish its Ryzen 3, Ryzen 5, Ryzen 7, and Ryzen 9 processors. AMD incorporates "X" and "XT" to denote higher clock speeds, while "X3D" signifies the use of AMD's 3D V-Cache. Additionally, we possess the "G" series, which features integrated graphics.

All these variances are crucial for comprehending the CPU's capabilities; nonetheless, there is no straightforward method to ascertain which product is superior. Based on the nomenclature, a Ryzen 5 is ostensibly a superior processor compared to a Ryzen 3. Nonetheless, this is not invariably true. Without conducting study, they may be unaware of whether they acquired the superior product.

Facilitated Sale of Rebranded Products

Occasionally, companies employ perplexing nomenclature to present older or rebranded products as novel. This strategy is prevalent when a firm seeks to liquidate inventory or reintroduce a marginally enhanced iteration of a prior product.

For instance, AMD transitioned the Ryzen 7 6800HS from 2022 to the subsequently launched Ryzen 7 7735HS in 2023. Upon examining the technical specifications of both models, it is evident that they employ identical technology and arguably deliver equivalent performance levels.

The Ryzen 7 7735HS is essentially equivalent to the Ryzen 7 6800HS; yet, due to AMD's 2023 rebranding, the Ryzen 7 7735HS appears to be a completely novel product.

To Elicit a Feeling of Superiority

Another rationale for intricate naming conventions is marketing. Companies aspire for their products to convey strength, sophistication, and value commensurate with their cost. Utilizing intricate nomenclature comprising numerous digits and characters might render a product more technical and outstanding.

Consider the NVIDIA "RTX 4090 Ti" as a case in point. The designation "4090" indicates its inclusion in the latest generation (GeForce 40 series), whereas the "Ti" suffix often signifies a superior variant of the base model. The lengthy, intricate name may initially be difficult to comprehend, although it undeniably conveys a sense of strength and innovation.

This nomenclature aims to instill a perception of superiority and rationalize an elevated price point. The drawback is that it may leave buyers feeling as though they want a degree in computer science merely to comprehend their purchases.

Evolving Technology Standards

Ultimately, as novel standards, features, and technologies arise, organizations must devise methods to integrate them into their product nomenclature.

Technology has evolved over the years. For instance, we have transitioned from traditional hard disk drives (HDDs) to solid-state drives (SSDs) and now to NVMe drives that provide even greater speeds. Each of these innovations necessitates a novel nomenclature to differentiate the latest models from their predecessors.

Concurrently, the emergence of AI and machine learning has led to the incorporation of novel terminologies and technologies such as "Tensor Cores" and "RT Cores" into processors. These developments must be incorporated into the product names, hence complicating the naming conventions.

The nomenclature of PC hardware arises from various sources, including the necessity to communicate technical specifications and the competitive pressures to enhance product sales. Although aficionados may value the subtleties, these intricate names might perplex and bewilder others. Regrettably, this is unlikely to alter in the near future. As technology advances and firms strive for market supremacy, naming conventions are likely to become increasingly complex in the future.