News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Evaluating M3 Pro CPU Cores: General Performance. Parent comment

Re:Evaluating M3 Pro CPU Cores: General Performance by traceroute66 on Wednesday November 29, 2023 @08:39AM (#38459171)
Some might argue that Apple's usage of it makes more sense. M-series for Macs and they are just incrementing numerically.

Meanwhile Arm Cortex is semi-random, sometimes incrementing (M0,M1) sometimes with a "+" designation (M0+) and then just seemingly random jumps up to non-sequential double digits (M23,M35,M52 with or without a P designation. Its like "come on guys, make your mind up".

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Evaluating M3 Pro CPU Cores: General Performance by fransje26 on Wednesday November 29, 2023 @09:22AM (#38459630)
Linus Torvalds' take on how much sense the ARM nomenclature makes. A funny read.

https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/7/15/133

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Evaluating M3 Pro CPU Cores: General Performance by DoingIsLearning on Wednesday November 29, 2023 @08:49AM (#38459277)
ARM at least has a clear reasoning for the letters:

M (Microcontroller), R (Real-time), and A (Application) core profiles.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Evaluating M3 Pro CPU Cores: General Performance by oblio on Wednesday November 29, 2023 @09:07AM (#38459460)
What kind of logic is that? Politeness, if not trademarks, should have prevented them from doing it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-M#Cortex-M3 - 2004.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_M3 - 2023.

> Some might argue that Apple's usage of it makes more sense. M-series for Macs and they are just incrementing numerically.

By this logic if you name a project Y but I can argue my naming of a much newer project Y is "more logical", you should abandon Y?

Chronology matters :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]