coercitiv
Diamond Member
- Jan 24, 2014
- 7,373
- 17,476
- 136
You're really setting yourself up for this.
Firefox restricted to 2 Threads. (0 and 2)
Firefox restricted to 4 Threads. (0, 1, 2 and 3)
Firefox restricted to 2 Threads. (0 and 2)
Firefox restricted to 4 Threads. (0, 1, 2 and 3)
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
You're really setting yourself up for this.
Firefox restricted to 2 Threads. (0 and 2)
Firefox restricted to 4 Threads. (0, 1, 2 and 3)
Uhh, you do know that those images prove NOTHING about multi-threading. The default Windows' scheduler will bounce even single-threaded apps between all cores, randomly.
A better test, is to open the Processes tab, and see if Firefox ever exceeds 25% on a quad-core, 12% on an 8-threaed, 50% on a dual-core, etc.
Even when I get a thread stuck and the Waterfox process is chewing CPU time, it only ever gets up to 50% on my 1007U dual-core.
Well, putting BayTrail in 15.6 inch laptop is stupid. People with a 15.6 inch laptop have for sure different requirements than 11.6 inch one, since 15.6 is pushing it for mobile and near desktop replacement. I would never even consider a 15.6 inch Pentium or Celeron (irrespective of it being Ivy Bridge, Haswell or BayTrail). Core i3 is the minimum I would consider, battery life be damned on that form factor since I would not consider carrying it around every day.
Sad news is that most of the Bay Trails today are installed into 15.6" laptops. Celeron N2830 currently takes over 20% of 15.6" market share.
Well I was looking for 1007u 11.6 inch laptops here and average price is 400 Euros. So, honestly, the difference between them is not enough to justify extra 100 Euros for something that is only used for browsing, Office apps and movies. I reaffirm what I said, for the price and use case BayTrail in Pentium form performs quite well.
And? It's not like people were being well served with Has well/Ivy Bridge Celeron either. Celeron were always gimped processors for people on a very tight budget. You get what you paid for. It's not like you could really game on Celerons previously.
That said I'll ask my friend with a laptop like that what her experience has been like.
Seba
Golden Member
- Sep 17, 2000
- 1,599
- 259
- 126
Just like I said that I would never get a 15.inch Pentium/Celeron, irrespective of it being BayTral, Ivy Bridge or Haswell. Its stupid to put such low performing CPU in that form factor.
Point is: the stupidity of having Pentium/Celeron there already exists, with or without BayTrail existence. A dead duck will always be a dead duck, nevermind its variation of a duck.
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
Uhm, this thread is about Bay Trail laptops. No-one mentioned anything about gaming. My opinion is that for web-browsing, the Intel big cores are preferable.
True. Celeron is an entry-level name used by Intel to keep up with today's time, and obsolete and slow by next year. Model varies, and Celerons can be big hit or miss.
Well, its your personal opinion against mine, so there is nothing to do about that. Concerning gaming, I talked about it because that is where you would see the huge difference between a BayTrail and an Haswell/Ivy Bridge. On web browsing, the difference is certainly there but is much much less perceptible, which is all I've been discussing here: user experience.
Last edited:
my brothers seems happy with his 15" sandy bridge Celeron (1.7GHz) since 2013
I suppose the n2830 is a little slower, but not that much...
I suppose the n2830 is a little slower, but not that much...
And he also will never get a 15.6" laptop with a tablet processor. That's how I call them "fake." Like he said, a 15.6" notebook size should have at least a socketed notebook processor, not a tablet processor.
Processor quality and physical appearance size are divided into several groups by Intel, ranked from slowest to fastest:
- Embedded nano (Intel Quark-D)
- Embedded tablet (Intel Silvermont-D)
- Embedded notebook (Intel Haswell-ULT/ULX)
- Socketed notebook (Intel Haswell-MB)
- Embedded desktop (Intel Haswell-D)
- Socketed desktop (intel Haswell-DT)
- Socketed desktop performance (Intel Haswell-E)
Last edited:
By extension I agree with you. That is why my case was always justified for a really mobile (15.6 inch is hardly mobile IMO) 11.6 inch laptop. And also why I said in my first post that I bought it to replace an ASUS Transformer (Android) tablet. In other words, I rather prefer to have a BayTrail fanless CPU in an 11.6 inch laptop than a Ivy Bridge/Haswell class of CPUs which need thicker chassis to accommodate a noisy fan.
Seba
Golden Member
- Sep 17, 2000
- 1,599
- 259
- 126
A Haswell Celeron can go up to 2,2GHz, and a Haswell Pentium up to 2,4GHz. Those are not slow processors.
And how much battery life do you get out of them again? Also, its not fair to compare BayTrail against Celeron and Pentium which are not ULV
True. These are standard, socketed, genuine 37W notebook processors we used to have for many years in the past. We're supposed to see Celeron 2970M and Pentium 3560M by now, but instead, we have 3 times slower Celeron N2840 and Pentium N3540 Bay Trail.
Impressive scores, though:
Celeron 2950M: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+2950M+%40+2.00GHz
Celeron 2970M: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+2970M+@+2.20GHz
Pentium 3550M: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+3550M+@+2.30GHz
Pentium 3560M: https://cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+3560M+@+2.40GHz&id=2458
Pentium 3560M's score is incorrect due to insufficient data, so we will look at Celeron G1820T 2.4 GHz (LGA1150 desktop) as a backup (both same 2.4 GHz speed, and no difference between the two except physical size and socket).
Celeron G1820T: https://cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+G1820T+@+2.40GHz&id=2169
Last edited:
Actually, scrap what I wrote, Im finding 15.6 inch Core i3 laptops for 500 euros. Times have changed...
Thats ackward.. An older Celeron beating a newer Pentium
And that bench is ackward, since I've seen other benches where the Pentium N3540 is toe to toe with my older Core i5 430M. The Core i5 430M score on Passmark is very similar to the Pentium 3550M.
Last edited:
According to Noteboockcheck ( http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Pentium-N3540-Notebook-Processor.117416.0.html ) the Pentium N3540 is:
- 13% slower than a Core i5 4202Y on Octane V2
- 10% slower than a Core i3 2367M on Cinebench Single Core
- 4% slower than a Core i3 2310M (or my older Core i5 430M) on Cinebench Multi Core
- 9% slower than a Core i3 4010U on Geekbench 3 Multicore
- 30% slower than a Celeron 2955U on Geekbench 3 Singlecore
- 7% slower than Core i3 3217U on Geekbench 2 Floating Point
- 12% slower than Core i5 3317U on Geekbench 2 Integer
- 3% slower than Core i5 3230M on x264HD Pass 2
- 5% slower than Core i3 4005U on x264HD Pass 1
- 2% faster than a Pentium 3556U on WinRar and 5% faster than Celeron 1017U
- 6% faster than a Core i3 4000M on wPrime 2.0x 1024m
- Equal to a Core i5 4250U on wPrime 32m
- Slow as a Nail on SuperPi, just equal to old Core 2 Duo processors and some AMD A4, A6 and A8 processors.
So unless you consider that a Core i3 class processor gives you a bad user experience on general computing tasks, I do not know how you can keep saying that the Pentium N3540 does not provide a decent user experience. From my own user experience I know it does. I will not talk about the Celeron BayTrail since I never used it. On the other hand, I do not remember anyone here saying they have experience with a Pentium N3540 and still you bash it. There was even someone saying that fanless BayTrail did not exist, to be promptly debunked by someone else. That is all.
- 13% slower than a Core i5 4202Y on Octane V2
- 10% slower than a Core i3 2367M on Cinebench Single Core
- 4% slower than a Core i3 2310M (or my older Core i5 430M) on Cinebench Multi Core
- 9% slower than a Core i3 4010U on Geekbench 3 Multicore
- 30% slower than a Celeron 2955U on Geekbench 3 Singlecore
- 7% slower than Core i3 3217U on Geekbench 2 Floating Point
- 12% slower than Core i5 3317U on Geekbench 2 Integer
- 3% slower than Core i5 3230M on x264HD Pass 2
- 5% slower than Core i3 4005U on x264HD Pass 1
- 2% faster than a Pentium 3556U on WinRar and 5% faster than Celeron 1017U
- 6% faster than a Core i3 4000M on wPrime 2.0x 1024m
- Equal to a Core i5 4250U on wPrime 32m
- Slow as a Nail on SuperPi, just equal to old Core 2 Duo processors and some AMD A4, A6 and A8 processors.
So unless you consider that a Core i3 class processor gives you a bad user experience on general computing tasks, I do not know how you can keep saying that the Pentium N3540 does not provide a decent user experience. From my own user experience I know it does. I will not talk about the Celeron BayTrail since I never used it. On the other hand, I do not remember anyone here saying they have experience with a Pentium N3540 and still you bash it. There was even someone saying that fanless BayTrail did not exist, to be promptly debunked by someone else. That is all.
Last edited:
- Aug 25, 2001
- 56,587
- 10,225
- 126
A 2955U is a far cry from an i3, and the N3540 is 30% slower, where it really counts as far as user-perception (single-threaded tasks).
On one single benchmark. Nit picking how much? Still 30% is a far cry from 2 to 3 times slower
Actually, multicore counts a LOT for user perception. If you have a dual core and have apps running using each its own core, there is less power available for the system to be responsive to user inputs. While a quad core, even if slower on single treaded applications will still have computing power available for user interaction in the same situation, therefore making the system more responsive. I've seen this situation with my old Core i5 430M (2 cores with HT) vs the Pentium N3540.
Last edited:
Really? So a Pentium N3540 2.7GHz is rated 30% slower than Celeron 2955U 1.4GHz Haswell? Eeekkk....no thanks.
Time for me to order more Celeron 2957U laptops before they're gone. I don't think we will see any new Broadwell Celeron 3205U 1.5GHz coming out for $229 or less price-range.
Last edited:
Really? So a Pentium N3540 2.7GHz is rated 30% slower than Celeron 2955U 1.4GHz Haswell? Eeekkk....
Time for me to order more of 2957U before they're gone.
If you find a Pentium N3540 very slow, its not a 30% difference that will make the 2957U a "very fast processor" is it?
Still, yes its better than nothing and you do well in getting the Pentium if it suits your needs better.
In a very stupid twist, I can only find 11.6 inches Chromebooks with the 2957U. Hard to find Windows ones. Ridiculous.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 389
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter