Naming scheme

depends on the company and processor line.

far more complex than that in the core2 line!
the even had the higher fsb models denoted with a xx50 at one point. Crazy Intel!

I was looking if there is any general convention used to give a name to a microprocessor. I wanted to know if the naming of microprocessor was based on processor speed or any other criteria.

Well look at the Core i7 series. The i920 is 2.66Ghz. The i940 is 2.93Ghz. The i945 is 3.2GHz. Its about on par with AMD right now.

When it came to Core 2 it was the low of E/Q6400 @ 2.13GHz and anything higher, up to the E/Q6800 was faster.Same with Penryn, E/Qwhatever and the highest Is the Q9770. But then it gets complicated. Any without a 50 has half the cache and any dual cores below the 8K series has lower cach or a lower FSB.

Man if only they could just say like the old P4 days. Core 2 3.2GHz or whatever. Make it so much easier TBH.

There is none really. Because the marketing department names them and not the engineers. Outside of a particular "series" of processors, there is no definite name scheme. The new i7 is 920,940, 965.... In which case the number means absolutely nothing other than the higher the number, the higher the stock clock. Look at the C2D e140, e2100, e5200, e7200, e8200, etc. The first number sort of designates the "group of processors" 1xxx is Celeron, 2xxx is Pentium, 5xxx 800MHZ 2MB cache, the 7xxx are 1066MHz 3MB cache, 8xxx are 1333MHz 6MB cache.... Kinda catch my drift here?