User talk:Artem S. Tashkinov

Consistency in CPU listing tables
Hi Artem S. Tashkinov,

This message is in addition to the important update email I have sent you. I think I have noticed you removing "Common features:" from the Cannon Lake article where it listed only one SKU. I am fine with that, but I'll explain that the reason for why I wrote it like that, is, consistency between various different CPU product listings. You see, my goal was to achieve a uniform look across those listing tables. So even if there's only one model, it says "Common features" much like how the other CPU series listings are presented. Hope that makes sense to you. But, I'll be leaving all this up to you from now on, as like I said in that email, I don't have the time to discuss and decide on sweeping changes these days anymore.

P.S.: this is what the Ryzen 8000G series APUs listing template looked like when I created it, I don't quite like how it looks now with all the extra columns added to the table. The Zen 4 + Zen 4c cores were already indicated in the "core config" column, where you can see in the footnote if it says "n + n", then that's Zen 4 and Zen 4c cores respectively. Also, Ryzen 8040 series mobile processors listing template then and now.

I usually only add columns to a table if there's a major architectural feature addition and the info varies across the models (e.g. E-cores on intel CPUs, the NPU).

That's all from me at this time.

Regards, — AP 499D25  (talk)  11:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * I just thought about the wording and it sounded redundant for a single CPU in the lineup. I've reverted the change anyways. It now looks kinda awkward but I didn't mean want to upset you or alter anything. @AP 499D25 Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 17:47, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The change was okay, I wasn't requesting a revert, just writing down why it was there (and noting edits to other tables breaking consistency while at it). — AP 499D25  (talk)  12:31, 20 July 2024 (UTC)