The criticism is about "EPYC" not about the codenames. That brand name has been used since 2017 but if you don't know that, it sounds quite gamery nowadays.
Admittedly I also have no idea why Intel calls theirs Xeon, which sounds like misspelled xenon. But then it might be a proper Greek word?
AMD CPUs have pretty small numbers for that, e.g. 100-000000651 or 100-000000789. They almost look wrong with so many zeroes. Zen/+/2 parts have part numbers like YD160XBCM6IAE (which is similar to the part numbers of much older AMD CPUs, which is apparently the AMD Ordering Part Number, OPN, scheme, and every digit codes information about the CPU). Zen 3 started with the new scheme, which just seem to be sequential development numbers. E.g. 3800X is 100-000000022. Here's a list: https://mkdev.info/?p=1245
Intel's naming isn't great, but it's pretty clear. Look at Wikipedia's List of Intel Processors[1] and for 14 generations since 2010, the higher the model number, the faster the processor. The model number like 13700 starts with the generation (13th) and then place in that (700 is upper-mid). Then a capital letter indicating something about form factor.
Compare with List of AMD processors[2] and a "70xx" model could be a Zen Naples Epic, A Zen 2 Mendocino Ryzen, a Zen 2 Rome Epyc, a Barceló-R Ryzen Zen 3, a Milan Epyc Zen 3, a Rembrandt-R Zen 3+, a Zen 4 Raphael Ryzen or Storm Peak Threadripper, or a laptop Ryzen. Wikipedia people can't even put these into a table to compare them, it's pages of random names and overlapping/re-used numbers.
Apple, as usual, have M1, M2, M3 and each one has plain/pro/max/ultra.
