IMO xeons are the most confusing, especially since they often run behind by a year or so. E3 vs E5 vs v2, vs v3, va v4, vs v5 vs core clock speed (important for single threaded apps and databases) vs multicore horizontal scale, 2650 v3 doesn't really explain the generation, clock speed, cache size or number of cores (maybe I'm stupid?)

Definitely. Xeons are targetted towards businesses, which generally have a wider variance of needs. So at that point, what can you do but give it a code name, and plenty of documentation. Clicking on the Xeon E5 v3 family link[0] and then click on "Compare All", takes to a page that has a feature by feature comparison of all of those processors[1], which you can use to pin down the specific processor to meet your needs.

[0] - http://ark.intel.com/products/family/78583/Intel-Xeon-Proces...

[1] - http://ark.intel.com/compare/?ids=85766,85765,85764,85763,85...

Xeons are a little more confusing,

E3/E5/E7 (market segment + socket), the first digit is the socket configuration (2/4/8), the next 3 digits are a model number and the vX at the end is the CPU generation.

The Xeon E3-1220v2 in my ProLiant ML10 is a lower-end, single socket Xeon in a fairly high performance segment.

The Xeon E5-2403v2 in my ThinkServer TD340 is a mid-range, dual socket Xeon in a fairly low performance segment.

The fact that the 3 digit identifier has no relation to overall performance is the biggest shame in the Xeon chips, considering Intel does this with the Core i3/i5/i7 products.

OTOH, Xeon's can vary so wildly it's hard to give a tangible performance or configuration metric to the model identifier. Things like overall CPU cache, core count, clock speed, expansion support (namely, number of PCIe lanes) all vary so much that you really have no choice but to look at ARK since there's no way to convey this in a more efficient manner.

I'd say Xeons are actually less confusing, given that they have an actual naming convention[1].

EX = product line

vX = generation

The clock speed omission is a bummer, but Xeons have two different clock speeds on all processors (one turbo -- which only a certain percentage of the cores can hit simultaneously), so things are a bit more complicated.

[1] https://semiaccurate.com/assets/uploads/2011/04/xeonmodels.p...

also core count varies between xeon version in the same generation/product line.

Sorry, it is not clear

The i3/i5/i7 is clear as market segmentation. But you never know which generation is the current one. Also there remains to be seen a clear differentiation between models "inside" i3/i5/i7 division

i7-6700k breaks down to ix-yzzzA

x is the brand family that most everyone is familiar with.

y is the generation. 6th gens with have a 6. 7th gens will have a 7.

zzz is roughly a capability indicator. The higher the number, the more powerful the processor (generally speaking). This is only comparable within the same generation. Comparisons will be off when comparing these identifiers to other generations, so it's suggested to us benchmarks.

A is a alphabetical modifier to indicate a feature like unlocked.

So an i7-6700k is an i7 family processor from the 6th generation (Sky Lake) at the 700 "level". The chip is also unlocked for overclocking. An i7-7700k is an i7 family processor from the 7th generation (Kaby Lake) at the 700 "level". This chip is also unlocked. Take all of the goodness from the previous generation's processor, and (more-or-less) give it the new optimization from the current generation.

Well, except for the "high end" Core-i7 SKUs. i7-6800k and above are based on the 5th generation Broadwell architecture, not the 6th generation as you might expect.

And honestly, the SKUs "level" is a fair bit more random than you imply; you wouldn't know from the model number that i7-6567U was significantly faster than a i7-6660U, for instance. Or that a i7-6700k significantly beats a i7-6700, which significantly beats a i7-6700T.

It's only within the same TDP that the level is non-random, but you aren't going to know this without going on ark.intel.com.

Thanks for the explanation. I can see it is understandable, but you see it's not obvious?

If I'm at a store and I see a i7-6700 and a i7-7300 which one is better? a i7-6735 or a i7-6720A? It doesn't make any sense for the general public.

Intel used to have one segment, then two segments: the Celeron and Pentium. Then it went for the Core 2, and then other lines

Especially today, that clock speeds are pretty much immaterial, they could take all those models and turn it into only a couple.

It's definitely non-intuitive without knowing the breakdown. If someone wants the skinny on a processor, I don't even bother explaining it unless they specifically want to know. I just link them to a benchmark and feature aggregator like cpuboss.

This comparison[0] shows how a 4th gen processor that has a higher over-all benchmark. It's still non-intuitive knowing the breakdown.

[0]: http://cpuboss.com/cpus/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7...