'Blasphemy!' says Intel (kind of) as they attack AMD using Zen 2 cores in a 7000 series chip

[filpo]

Summary

 

Quotes

Truth #1

Quote

 

 

Quote

Starting with the first "Core Truth", Intel states that AMD is shipping a dated CPU architecture in its Ryzen 7000 lineup of processors. The chip used as an example here is the Ryzen 7520U which is a Mendocino CPU based on the 6nm Zen 2 core architecture. The Zen 2 core architecture was first released in 2019 on the 7nm process node with Mendocino "Ryzen 7020" series getting an update to a 6nm process node. The chip also houses an RDNA 2 core architecture.

 

While we agree that AMD's Naming Scheme for its latest mobile CPUs is very confusing, the same can be said for Intel's new naming scheme which features similarly named SKUs with varying architectures. The 1st Gen Core CPUs feature the Raptor Lake CPU architecture while the 1st Gen Core Ultra CPUs feature the Meteor Lake Architecture.

 

Quote

Following is how AMD segments its Ryzen 7000 CPU lineup:

• Mendocino (Ryzen 7020 Series) - Everyday Computing
• Barcelo-R (Ryzen 7030 Series) - Mainstream Thin & Light
• Rembrandt-R (Ryzen 7035 Series) - Premium Thin & Light
• Phoenix Point (Ryzen 7040 Series) - Elite Ultrathin
• Dragon Range (Ryzen 7045 Series) - Extreme Gaming & Creator

Following is how Intel segments its 1st Gen Core (Ultra) CPU lineup:

• Raptor Lake Refresh (Core 120U)
• Meteor Lake (Core Ultra 125U)

 

Quote

Intel also goes ahead in comparing the AMD Ryzen 5 7520U "Mendocino" CPU with its own Core i5-1335U "Raptor Lake" CPU. The performance figures show Intel's chip offering an 83% uplift in terms of performance. Mendocino CPUs are designed for entry-level laptops and retail mostly in the sub $500 US segment.

'Truth' #2

Quote

The second "Core Truth" pretty much is the same thing, calling out AMD for the use of its latest Ryzen 7000 branding while shipping older architectures under the family.

 

Truth #3

Quote

 

Truth #4

Quote

Another point that could be made about Core Truth #4 is that Intel employs two types of cores in its latest processors. They have a P-Core and an E-Core which is part of their hybrid and the future disaggregated chiplet design. The P-Cores and E-Cores are based on different architectures and the E-Cores are known to hamper gaming performance if proper optimizations are not in place via the Thread Director technology. Meanwhile, AMD's hybrid chips use the same ISA (Zen 4 & Zen 4C) so in this case, Intel has the disadvantage and their statement goes against them.

 

Quote

However one should point out that neither pricing nor efficiency which plays a major role in the laptop segment is mentioned. A lot of this "Core Truth" marketing buzz is reminiscent of its old "Real-World" Performance slides which were proven to be very misleading tests to show AMD's Ryzen Desktop CPUs as inferior products against Intel's offerings.

 

There is no doubt that the existing branding schemes from Intel for Core CPUs and AMD for Ryzen CPUs are some of the worst that we have seen. AMD went a step further to help customers distinguish between the Zen 4 and older CPUs by using new marketing logos on the products. But a more concise naming scheme from Intel and AMD would help customers more than just calling out each other for using similarly confusing naming for their CPUs using their new & old architectures.

 

My thoughts

Now the price gap between the cpu specs is about $200, which in the budget land, is quite a lot with the cheapest 7520U laptop I can find is this one for $350 Amazon.com: Acer Aspire 3 A314-23P-R3QA Slim Laptop | 14.0" Full HD IPS Display | AMD Ryzen 5 7520U Quad-Core Processor | AMD Radeon Graphics | 8GB LPDDR5 | 512GB NVMe SSD | Wi-Fi 6 | Windows 11 Home,Silver : Electronics

Then the cheapest I5-1335U laptop I can find is this one. While it does seem to be of higher build quality (my friend has one but it doesn't seem spectacular), most of the specs are the same, same RAM, same storage, same wifi spec, a slightly bigger screen Lenovo IdeaPad Slim 5 Laptop: Core i5-1335U, 512GB SSD, 8GB DDR5 RAM, 16" 1920x1200 Display - Newegg.com

This new turn of habit isn't great to see from intel, due to the fact that they also (or will also) have a confusing naming scheme with their Core and Core Ultra while the i3, i5, i7 and i9 names were perfectly understandable and, if anything, were better than AMD's current naming scheme (which they've explained before, but I guess we can give Intel the win on this front 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but AFAIK eSports gaming isn't more demanding than AI and Machine Learning (at least in terms of 'Multitasking Capability'), even though that's what they're stating in the slide below. Anyone know what's going on there?

Insight below from @sazrocks

 

The laptop that the AMD chip is in is $350:
https://store.acer.com/en-us/a315-24p-r2sc-us

 

But the laptop Intel used for its chip is $750???

https://www.lenovo.com/us/en/configurator/cto/index.html?bundleId=82YNCTO1WWUS1

 

What on earth is this comparison?

it looks like they benchmarked the AMD chip about 4 months before benchmarking the intel system so driver and chipset updates could have improved its score a bit (albeit not by much of course)

Sources

Intel Calls Out AMD For Using Old Cores In New CPUs In "Core Truths" Marketing Playbook, Is This "Real-World Performance" 2.0? (wccftech.com)

Intel compares AMD Zen2 architecture in Ryzen 7000 series to snake oil - VideoCardz.com

 

Edited December 7, 2023 by filpo
sazrocks spotted the difference in price between the two laptops used for benchmarking and gamers nexus released a video on the news and so did techlinked

[starsmine]

Man this has to be one of the MOST distasteful ad campaigns from either brand in a long time. I am so beyond skeeved out. 

"we have nothing, lets mislead the consumer"

Fuck off intel

Price performance and support is what matters. How "new" one part of the micro architecture is, is literally inconsequential other then it informing performance. 

[PDifolco]

Typical corpo half truths/half lies

They  expect people to read the numbers as Intel uses them, the AMD numbering may be quite cryptical but is less deceiving than say "14th Gen"  

So they compare a 1335U to a 7920U where they should compare it to a 7940U

And they don't talk about Threadripper 7000 ?  

 

 

 

 

[Athan Immortal]

I've had Ryzen since day 1 in 2017, a 1700X, followed by 3700X, a laptop with a 4500U and now a 5800X3D. Despite appearances I'm not team anything, I just buy what's best in my budget at the time.

 

The AMD naming scheme for their 7000 laptops is BS. It's very misleading because people have been trained to look for the series by the thousand. It was bad enough when you'd have the likes of the 3400G being Zen+ instead of Zen 2, but we're now talking about several generations of hardware difference in expectation.

 

With that said, Intel are on shaky ground considering their intended naming scheme for their next gen of processors, and changing their fab processes names to match TSMC. 10nm to Intel 7 for example.

 

It's all designed to be confusing. We're in some of the best time for consumer processors in years, and deceptive naming like this just creates confusion.

[filpo]

Just now, starsmine said:

"we have nothing, lets mislead the consumer"

It's not too misleading as such, they're benchmarks are correct, the 1355u does perform better. But the way it's presented just sounds so passive-aggressive (at least to me)

 

Just now, PDifolco said:

And they don't talk about Threadripper 7000 ?

cuz they know Xeon is gonna get slapped by it

 

Just now, PDifolco said:

So they compare a 1335U to a 7920U where they should compare it to a 7940U

they would never do that to themselves. They compared it to a 7520u

 

1 minute ago, PDifolco said:

"14th Gen"

Or core/core ultra, that's going to go spectacularly, hopefully

[YoungBlade]

The eSports at the top of that chart also really confuses me, unless they are referring to game streaming, in which case, fair enough - streaming on the CPU while gaming is a very CPU intensive task that uses many cores. Although typically, you should use the iGPU for encoding, but that doesn't mean CPU encoding isn't a core-heavy task.

 

For pure eSports, Intel puts more cache into their Core i9 models, which does make them better for gaming (same principle as V-Cache, but on a much smaller scale) and the i9 chips clock higher for the P cores, which obviously also helps with gaming. However, with rare exceptions, eSports titles tend to use only a few cores, so putting that at the top of a multitasking chart without specifying that it involves CPU encoding when streaming is misleading (if that's even what they meant).

 

As for the heart of the ad campaign, I mostly agree with the sentiment - I think AMD's naming here is anti-consumer, and I despise it - but this is not how Intel should handle the situation. It makes them come off as petty and breaks a classic marketing rule of never talking directly about your competitor, unless they are the market leader and you are trying to disrupt them. As far as I know, AMD is not the market leader in laptops, so for Intel to be drawing consumer attention to the competition - and thus reminding consumers that they have a choice other than Intel - is dubious.

[starsmine]

9 minutes ago, Athan Immortal said:

I've had Ryzen since day 1 in 2017, a 1700X, followed by 3700X, a laptop with a 4500U and now a 5800X3D. Despite appearances I'm not team anything, I just buy what's best in my budget at the time.

 

The AMD naming scheme for their 7000 laptops is BS. It's very misleading because people have been trained to look for the series by the thousand. It was bad enough when you'd have the likes of the 3400G being Zen+ instead of Zen 2, but we're now talking about several generations of hardware difference in expectation.

AMD literally isnt being misleading to consumers
Consumers care about two things, is the product new (as in support and IO)
and performance. HOW the performance is achieved does NOT mater. 

The fact that NEW die shrunk zen 2 chips exist at the bottom of the product stack is perfect for price performance and support and modern IO. 

Its not like new bottom stack chips dont perform worse then previous top end chips or anything. And the fact that intel is lying about what sticker will be on the product is wild. Just like how intel stickers change when you use a core i3 vs a Pentium, AMD has the same thing going on when you look at 7040 laptops and 7020 laptops

8 minutes ago, filpo said:

It's not too misleading as such, they're benchmarks are correct, the 1355u does perform better. But the way it's presented just sounds so passive-aggressive (at least to me)

If intel wants to claim their pentiums are faster then the 7020 series at the same wattage, so be it. they dont have to intentionally mislead about it to market that fact. 

9 minutes ago, Athan Immortal said:

With that said, Intel are on shaky ground considering their intended naming scheme for their next gen of processors, and changing their fab processes names to match TSMC. 10nm to Intel 7 for example.

 

It's all designed to be confusing. We're in some of the best time for consumer processors in years, and deceptive naming like this just creates confusion.

Again, its not confusing. because HOW something is done for a consumer does not mater, its that its being done. 

[Middcore]

Lol at "Core Truth #3." What does this even mean? How is it relevant to anything? If you buy AMD instead of Intel then "education and learning" are harmed somehow? 

 

[Agall]

The sad reality is that AMD only stays ahead of the game by using the latest and greatest fabrication, while also doing gimmicks like 3D v-cache.

 

If Intel decided to make a generation of CPUs on TSMC 5nm, it would be a blood bath. 

 

Yeah, smear campaigns are dumb, but Zen2 still lives on today in the Steam Deck's SoC on 6nm. It's still a great architecture.

[TVwazhere]

This isnt the first time Intel has taken a smear campaign tactic to competition. Anyone remembered "glues together CPU dies"?

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/

 

[filpo]

13 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

As for the heart of the ad campaign, I mostly agree with the sentiment - I think AMD's naming here is anti-consumer, and I despise it - but this is not how Intel should handle the situation. It makes them come off as petty and breaks a classic marketing rule of never talking directly about your competitor, unless they are the market leader and you are trying to disrupt them. As far as I know, AMD is not the market leader in laptops, so for Intel to be drawing consumer attention to the competition - and thus reminding consumers that they have a choice other than Intel - is dubious.

what the presentation confuses me the most about (apart from that weird graph) is the timing, more than a year after the release of the 7520U (and assumingly, most of the other 7000 mobile cpus give or take a few weeks/months)

Why would they release it now? Just to disrupt them? Even though I agree they're not the market leader, intel is still, at least in my opinion, the best for laptop cpus at the high end. But AMD takes the crown at the low end with this 7520u coming in at $200 than the cheapest 1335u laptop even if the 1335u is better by some degree (according to their presentation benchmarks)

13 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

nless they are referring to game streaming, in which case, fair enough - streaming on the CPU while gaming is a very CPU intensive task that uses many cores. Although typically, you should use the iGPU for encoding, but that doesn't mean CPU encoding isn't a core-heavy task.

but then why wouldn't they state that? Intel have done things like this before and been slightly unclear in their marketing

 

13 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

However, with rare exceptions, eSports titles tend to use only a few cores, so putting that at the top of a multitasking chart without specifying that it involves CPU encoding when streaming is misleading (if that's even what they meant).

Is 'AI and Machine learning' as well as 'Simulation and Modelling' more demanding in terms of multi core usage than gaming?

I would think so (unless you're playing at 480p with a 4090, but there's extents to this)

3 minutes ago, TVwazhere said:

This isnt the first time Intel has taken a smear campaign tactic to competition. Anyone remembered "glues together CPU dies"?

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/

 

I was only about 9 when this came out but even then I still know that it sounds like something intel would do

 

5 minutes ago, Middcore said:

If you buy AMD instead of Intel then "education and learning" are harmed somehow? 

you don't understand do you? How do you think Microsoft 365 will run on a 4 year old cpu? It'll be like playing Starfield on a graphing calculator! TOTAL POWERPOINT!

[YoungBlade]

1 minute ago, TVwazhere said:

This isnt the first time Intel has taken a smear campaign tactic to competition. Anyone remembered "glues together CPU dies"?

 

https://www.pcgamer.com/intel-slide-criticizes-amd-for-using-glued-together-dies-in-epyc-processors/

 

I thought about that immediately. And I also remembered Jayztwocents in his video on Ryzen 5000 series bashing Intel over it, saying that the 5000 series are "just glued" in a mocking voice and saying that he wished Intel would glue something together that wasn't 14nm++++++++++++ - as Intel still only had 10th gen out at that point.

3 minutes ago, Agall said:

The sad reality is that AMD only stays ahead of the game by using the latest and greatest fabrication, while also doing gimmicks like 3D v-cache.

 

If Intel decided to make a generation of CPUs on TSMC 5nm, it would be a blood bath. 

 

Yeah, smear campaigns are dumb, but Zen2 still lives on today in the Steam Deck's SoC on 6nm. It's still a great architecture.

Then Intel should just do that and win all the marketshare and money. The fact that they don't makes me believe that it's not as simple as simply giving their CPUs a die shrink and calling it a day.

 

It's no different than when Intel was trapped on 14nm for almost 8 years, and everyone talked about how Intel 10nm was denser an more efficient than TSMC 7nm, and thus Intel would be winning if only they had their 10nm node running at scale.

 

Which is to say, the point is completely irrelevant. At the time, all I could say was, "Good for Intel, now have them put that in a CPU so we can buy it, and then I'll care." Until they did that, I didn't care, and no one but Intel's own engineering team should have cared either.

 

"If Intel" doesn't put any performance into my system. "If Intel" doesn't sell 14th "gen" CPUs, or make them less of a cash grab joke. And "if Intel" doesn't mean that AMD doesn't have a technical lead in gaming at the moment.

 

I would be perfectly happy if Intel was back on top right now, I have no special loyalty to AMD, and I want competition, but making excuses about V-Cache being a "gimmick" or saying "if Intel did X, they would be winning" is just silly, IMO.

[Agall]

21 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

The fact that they don't makes me believe that it's not as simple as simply giving their CPUs a die shrink and calling it a day.

 

It's no different than when Intel was trapped on 14nm for almost 8 years, and everyone talked about how Intel 10nm was denser an more efficient than TSMC 7nm, and thus Intel would be winning if only they had their 10nm node running at scale.

 

Which is to say, the point is completely irrelevant. At the time, all I could say was, "Good for Intel, now have them put that in a CPU so we can buy it, and then I'll care." Until they did that, I didn't care, and no one but Intel's own engineering team should have cared either.

 

I would be perfectly happy if Intel was back on top right now, I have no special loyalty to AMD, and I want competition, but making excuses about V-Cache being a "gimmick" or saying "if Intel did X, they would be winning" is just silly, IMO.

Intel sat on 14nm for as long as they did because they could. Its absurdly expensive to retool fab, TSMC seems to do it through scale. Intel as a company does seem hamstrung by that, but that might be changing since they've been building more fab facilities which I would imagine are starting out on better lithography.

 

They wouldn't do it because it wouldn't be economical, I assume. They might be able to make a 5nm 14900k with a shrink that actually works as intended with a bit of engineering, but they'd lose the profits they get from using their own facility. I imagine it would cost substantially more than it already does. Let alone considering the yields, binning, I imagine it would be all more expensive.

 

They could do it, there's obviously reasons why they don't. I just find people assuming that AMD's ahead because of their architecture/design, when in reality if we compared 1:1 lithography, it wouldn't be so.

 

Mind you that AMD's been on 7nm since Ryzen 3000. I don't think Intel's even made a CPU at 7nm, even taking them a few years later to start making 10nm desktop CPUs.

 

Intel will spend $14 billion on manufacturing its new chips at TSMC: Report | Tom's Hardware (tomshardware.com)

 

We might not have to wait long to see who's correct.

[Zando_]

32 minutes ago, filpo said:

It's not too misleading as such, they're benchmarks are correct, the 1355u does perform better. But the way it's presented just sounds so passive-aggressive (at least to me)

Yeah, it's clearly worded to take advantage of people who don't know much about tech, and thus won't understand that the Ryzen chips being based off older tech isn't inherently bad. Quite gross. 

[YoungBlade]

12 minutes ago, filpo said:

what the presentation confuses me the most about (apart from that weird graph) is the timing, more than a year after the release of the 7520U (and assumingly, most of the other 7000 mobile cpus give or take a few weeks/months)

Why would they release it now? Just to disrupt them? Even though I agree they're not the market leader, intel is still, at least in my opinion, the best for laptop cpus at the high end. But AMD takes the crown at the low end with this 7520u coming in at $200 than the cheapest 1335u laptop even if the 1335u is better by some degree (according to their presentation benchmarks)

I don't believe this presentation is intended for consumers. I believe it is intended for laptop manufacturers to get them to reconsider including AMD CPUs in their upcoming systems for 2024.

 

We're way too late in the game for this messaging to impact consumer sales anytime soon. Back-to-School is over (yes, there'll be some for students starting in January, but it's nothing compared to the main Back-to-School sales in July and August) and the holiday shopping season is in full swing, sure, but Black Friday and Cyber Monday are passed. Most students who did shopping for laptops have at the very least already done their research and told their parents and families what they want.

 

13 minutes ago, filpo said:

but then why wouldn't they state that? Intel have done things like this before and been slightly unclear in their marketing

 

Is 'AI and Machine learning' as well as 'Simulation and Modelling' more demanding in terms of multi core usage than gaming?

I would think so (unless you're playing at 480p with a 4090, but there's extents to this)

AI, ML, Simulations, and Modeling are all generally much more multi-core heavy than gaming. You can find exceptions - some of the former actually can't be parallelized, and thus are single-core limited. And some games actually do use a lot of cores. But those are the exceptions, not the rules.

 

Again, going off my hypothesis that this is targeted at laptop makers selling consumer laptops, I think they put eSports at the top because gaming sells consumer laptops very well. It's a much bigger draw in the consumer space than "machine learning" or "modelling" is right now.

[starsmine]

Just now, YoungBlade said:

I don't believe this presentation is intended for consumers. I believe it is intended for laptop manufacturers to get them to reconsider including AMD CPUs in their upcoming systems for 2024.

There is no way with this tone would it be for OEMs
OEMs are engineers who know better and would call them out from the start.

This is ELI5 but with half-truths specifically chosen to mislead a consumer against a product with FUD. 

The glued-together thing was targeted towards purchasers as well, not OEMS. Business people who dont (and dont need to know) the internals of how a system work and get them to argue with IT over system aquisitions.

[Middcore]

4 minutes ago, starsmine said:

There is no way with this tone would it be for OEMs
OEMs are engineers who know better and would call them out from the start.

This is ELI5 but with half-truths specifically chosen to mislead a consumer against a product with FUD. 

Yeah the "education and learning" thing I mocked earlier in the thread is a a total nothing-burger that OEMs would laugh at, but I can see it being an angle they'd try on consumers. 

[porina]

3 minutes ago, Agall said:

Intel sat on 14nm for as long as they did because they could. 

They sat at 14nm forever because they couldn't move forward. Everything was broken. Even 14nm was broken at launch. Look at Broadwell. It launched late with desktop getting two offerings just to say they released it at all. They're still on their recovery path right now, and the end of the road is in sight. The next two years will be very interesting.

 

About the only way out they could have had earlier would be shifting to TSMC.

 

3 minutes ago, Agall said:

I don't think Intel's even made a CPU at 7nm, even taking them a few years later to start making 10nm desktop CPUs.

Do you not count Intel 7? Or are you sticking to their old NAME of 10nm? Intel 7 still doesn't seem as polished as N7 but it's pretty close.

 

In just over a week we'll have on sale Meteor Lake cores on Intel 4. While the absence of desktop parts makes it less interesting to many around here, it will give us a good look at how their recovery path is going.

 

The next step for desktop could be on 20A process, or at worst some variation of N3. We could be looking at about 3 node jump on desktop so it better be good.

[TVwazhere]

35 minutes ago, filpo said:

I was only about 9 when this came out but even then I still know that it sounds like something intel would do

*me, who turned 30 this year*

[YoungBlade]

4 minutes ago, starsmine said:

There is no way with this tone would it be for OEMs
OEMs are engineers who know better and would call them out from the start.

This is ELI5 but with half-truths specifically chosen to mislead a consumer against a product with FUD. 

The glued-together thing was targeted towards purchasers as well, not OEMS. Business people who dont (and dont need to know) the internals of how a system work and get them to argue with IT over system aquisitions.

If this is targeted at businesses or school administrators who would be buying these laptops, it seems confusing to me that they would prominently display "eSports" as something their Core i9 series is good at.

4 minutes ago, Middcore said:

Yeah the "education and learning" thing I mocked earlier in the thread is a a total nothing-burger that OEMs would laugh at, but I can see it being an angle they'd try on consumers. 

That's a fair point. But the presentation also seems odd if it's for direct consumers. The timing is wrong. The talking points are very high-level.

 

School administrators could be the target - that would make sense for most of these, but again, including eSports as the top thing their best CPUs are good for seems bizarre if that's the case. What administrator buys laptops for their schools to help the students play eSports games better?

[starsmine]

16 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

If this is targeted at businesses or school administrators who would be buying these laptops, it seems confusing to me that they would prominently display "eSports" as something their Core i9 series is good at.

That's a fair point. But the presentation also seems odd if it's for direct consumers. The timing is wrong. The talking points are very high-level.

 

School administrators could be the target - that would make sense for most of these, but again, including eSports as the top thing their best CPUs are good for seems bizarre if that's the case. What administrator buys laptops for their schools to help the students play eSports games better?

no school admin are buying i9s for a fleet
but a student might

It also notes that the i9 is not available for chrome OS laptops, its not targeted towards school fleets. 

[YoungBlade]

1 minute ago, starsmine said:

no school admin are buying i9s for a fleet
but a student might

It also notes that the i9 is not available for chrome OS laptops, its not targeted towards school fleets. 

If it's targeted directly at students, then why is this coming out so long after the Back-to-School season? And why does it include info on laptop recommendations for 5-10 year olds at all if the presentation is targeted at students directly? Most children of that age range are not going to understand this presentation - they wouldn't know the meaning of the word "architecture" in this context, there aren't enough pictures to keep their attention, and they might not know what "snake oil" even is.

 

However, that chart would make perfect sense if it was for school admins who make purchasing decisions for an entire school district, so that they are "informed" on what grade of laptop is best for each level of schooling.

 

I feel like we're missing a key piece of context with these slides to explain who they are for.

[starsmine]

Just now, YoungBlade said:

If it's targeted directly at students, then why is this coming out so long after the Back-to-School season? And why does it include info on laptop recommendations for 5-10 year olds at all if the presentation is targeted at students directly? Most children of that age range are not going to understand this presentation - they wouldn't know the meaning of the word "architecture" in this context, there aren't enough pictures to keep their attention, and they might not know what "snake oil" even is.

 

However, that chart would make perfect sense if it was for school admins who make purchasing decisions for an entire school district, so that they are "informed" on what grade of laptop is best for each level of schooling.

 

I feel like we're missing a key piece of context with these slides to explain who they are for.

I think its more for parents. 

[YoungBlade]

1 minute ago, starsmine said:

I think its more for parents. 

But the slide wording of "Keep this in mind when ordering 'comparable' or 'equivalent' technologies" is odd if it's for parents. Parents would be ordering a single laptop, not "technologies" - it sounds like what you'd say so someone buying in bulk for an organization, not to an individual consumer. I'd imagine they'd use a word like "purchasing" or "buying" rather than "ordering" if this was direct to consumer marketing.

 

And most parents, while they care about their child's education, aren't as concerned about the "future of education" and what it "depends" on.

[starsmine]

also I brought this up earlier.

Intel is using the sticker design that is supposed to tell you "old micro" is used and said the sticker is lying to you because the arch used in the laptop is old in the first slide in OP's post.

I will give intel this, this information is not known to the target audience, so they might have a point there. but that point is lost by them not bringing up the point that AMD does communicate Newest arch with the orange sticker. 

"oh amd is being misleading about this, so we will be even more misleading by intentionally not saying the truth"