New Intel Trademark Filed

jmanforever writes "Reuters is reporting that 'Intel Inside VIIV' and 'Intel VIIV' were filed as U.S. trademarks. The question is, what does VIIV mean? Could this be the Roman numerals for 6-4 indicating a 64-bit chip, or could this be the Roman numeral five twice, separated by two lines, indicating the dual cores of the Pentium 5 chip?"

Comments

I'm betting on

[Performaman]

Pentium 525. Dunno why, but it just sounds right.

stackable design?

[LiquidMind]

"The Pentium V is likely to fly along at between 5GHz to 7GHz, have 2MB plus of level two cache, be built on a 90 nanometer process, and have a stackable design." (Source, and another)

does anyone know what they mean by stackable design?
is this supposed to be taken literally? stacking one CPU on top of the other?
or just some buzzwords that mean nothing that this implies?

Re:stackable design?

[MBCook]

I believe that this refers to the ability to "stack" the cores together, that is create multicore chips. Sure there are supposed to be multicore P4s and Pentium Ms, but they are "hacked" together, not optomized for it. AMD's Opteron, on the other hand, has been designed for it from the start.

That's my guess. Literally stacking cores not only would have terrible heat problems, but how do you deal with all those pins? 478 per core (the Pentium V will probably use even more than that) is 956 pins. But you would have to have a socket for those dual core chips, and another seperate socket for the single core chips. Complicated. Either that or you'd have to use 956 pin sockets for ALL chips and just not use half the pins. Again, complicated.

Natural dual/triple/quad/whatever core is my guess. Not hacked, but designed for it specifically.

Reminds me

[geneing]

Somehow this reminds me about another trademark "Pentax *ist" (a bunch of digital cameras). It's way too silly to pronounce that ("May I see that Pentax starist camera please...")

The official explanation is that '*' can stand for anything you consider your are (like artist).

Perhaps...

[natron 2.0]

It could be a Pentium 5 with Intel Inside

Example:

V=5
II=Intel Inside
V=5

Roman numerals aren't positional...

[curious.corn]

VIIV isn't VI(6E1)+IV(4E0). that's totally wrong. Romans used different letters to distinguish 1 (I), 5 (V), 10 (X), 50 (L), 100 (C), 500 (D), 1000 (M) You get magnitude relatives to the letter by subtracting (prefixing) or adding (postfixing) the preceding magnitude unit: 1 (I), 10(X), 100 (C) up to 3 symbols. That's a rough description mind you as this rule takes an exception on the 5* symbols which can't repeat (they're a sort of calculating cornerstone). Yeah it sucks, one wonders how they could get along commerce, taxes and precise civil engineering calculations with this method. So, an intel 64 should read "intel LXIV"... if they really intend to pursue this nomenclature we'll have a glorious laugh over here. (I'm typing from less than 1 mile away from the Appia Antica)