Bay Trail's not so bad... (N2830)

[Picao84]

think we will see any new Broadwell Celeron 3205U 1.5GHz.

I would think thats what the new Core M lineup is for? Celeron will be further degraded and hopefully underpriced.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I would think thats what the new Core M lineup is for? Celeron will be further degraded and hopefully underpriced.

No, Core M is expensive, it's not a replacement for a Celeron.

 

[Picao84]

No, Core M is expensive, it's not a replacement for a Celeron.

Oh god, you are right
Talk about overpriced, 800-1000 dollars for a Core M is too much...

 

[VirtualLarry]

In a very stupid twist, I can only find 11.6 inches Chromebooks with the 2957U. Hard to find Windows ones. Ridiculous.

I agree with that statement.

 

[waltchan]

In a very stupid twist, I can only find 11.6 inches Chromebooks with the 2957U. Hard to find Windows ones. Ridiculous.

Cost too much to produce if Windows is added, that's why you won't find one.

"We're better off installing Chrome instead," says the manufacturer, "because we already paid a lot of money for that 2957U processor.

 

[Picao84]

These are the results for shopping for a 3556U laptop:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sour...F-8#q=pentium+3556u&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

Minimum price £294.97 and average is between £300 and £400

Now for the 3540:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sour...F-8#q=pentium+n3540&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

Minimum price £223.40 and average is between £200 and £300
Yes you can find more expensive ones, but in convertibles which are always more expensive than traditional laptop form factor. Pure laptops with the N3540 are around that price.

I also looked for older Pentium like the 2020M and guess what? Could only find one model for £259.97. The average price is, still after almost 2 years of release, shockingly between £300 and £400.

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sour...F-8#q=pentium+2020m&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

Conclusion: there isn't an overlap in prices between BayTrail and Haswell/Ivy Bridge Pentiums. The status quo did not change as you perceive it and the good news is that this might indicate that Broadwell Pentium's might still be coming. Now, should higher performance BayTrails be called Pentiums? Maybe not, but its all a question of marketing. In the end, people are still paying for what they got, since higher performance Pentiums kept their existent price. What Intel did was create a new "step" in the performance ladder, with a lower price.

Note: most of the laptops that I found on the search are 13.3+ size. Since, on my purchase, I was looking explicitly for an 11.6 inch one, I still feel that I got a good deal for the 300 euros (converted from £) I paid. It's hard to find 11.6 inch laptops with more performance than an N3540 at that price. Most of them are equipped with a BayTrail Celeron.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I think that it is a little bit deceptive on Intel's part to re-use the Pentium and Celeron names, to describe CPUs of a totally different architecture to their primary "Core" line. It produces performance expectations for users that aren't really valid anymore. Consumer sees "Pentium quad-core", for a "cheap" price, and goes, "Oh my!". When in fact, they're getting under-powered garbage.

 

[jpiniero]

Even if Intel doesn't want to, it sure looks like OEMs don't really want Core Celerons and Pentiums anymore.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

Interesting that you should bring that up, as I read someone's comment in another thread a few weeks back, that they were replacing their slower Core2Quad CPUs, with faster clock-speed Core2Duo CPUs off of ebay, because of the even greater need for single-threaded performance these days, especially with web browsing.

That's absurd. Literally an absurd line of thinking. They clearly didn't investigate clocking their quads low to see if their browser would utilize more than two cores.

 

[seitur]

I think that it is a little bit deceptive on Intel's part to re-use the Pentium and Celeron names, to describe CPUs of a totally different architecture to their primary "Core" line. It produces performance expectations for users that aren't really valid anymore. Consumer sees "Pentium quad-core", for a "cheap" price, and goes, "Oh my!". When in fact, they're getting under-powered garbage.

It is not "little bit deceptive".

It is outright obviously deceptive.

 

[waltchan]

Even if Intel doesn't want to, it sure looks like OEMs don't really want Core Celerons and Pentiums anymore.

The new Atom x3, Atom x5, and Atom x7 have just been announced, so more choices for OEMs, and no chance for any Broadwell Celeron release:

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...ing-atom-x3-x5-and-x7-processors-ahead-of-mwc

The slowest Atom x3 may be for tablets, but you never know if the PC makers will install Atom x3 as well, and then the next year 15.6" laptops are SLOWER by another 25% from Celeron N2840 due to cheaper price (I'm expecting around 800 total benchmark score).

Bay Trail will be replaced to Cherry Trail, and Pentium N3700 1.6 GHz Braswell has been announced. We fear the N3700 is going to be a little slower than the current N3540 due to 500 MHz lower base speed.

http://vr-zone.com/articles/intel-pentium-n3700-braswell-cpu-for-desktops-coming-by-q2/87393.html

 

[coercitiv]

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.

Firefox has it's own multithreading project called Electrolysis (e10s) which has been active in the nightly builds and was supposed to go live with FF 36. Soon enough even FF will be efficiently multhithreaded and will have separate UI and rendering threads.

Meanwhile, believe what you may about the screenshots I presented.

 

[TurtleCrusher]

The picture below is loading up a single tab in chrome. Look at the CPU usage when the FX-83xx is locked to 1.4Ghz.

Weird huh? Able to utilize 4 cores fully on a simple page for quick rendering.

Now look what happens when I load up a few tabs, which is very common for most people.

The software for multi-core CPUs is there, and these ultra low-power 4 core CPUs will fare well in mobile devices.

 

[Shivansps]

Yeah, great. Your Bay Trail reaches 100% (or near 100%) on all cores at the same time just while browsing.

2 Pages open, one is fb + Youtube video playback(i use IE for youtube because chrome its not HW accelerated for some reason) + Steam open + megasync + skype its not "just web browsing".

And one little peak its not 100%, all cores load its balanced, you dont see 1 or 2 cores doing more work than the other 2, and thats the point here.

 

[ninaholic37]

These are the results for shopping for a 3556U laptop:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sour...F-8#q=pentium+3556u&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

Minimum price £294.97 and average is between £300 and £400

Now for the 3540:

https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sour...F-8#q=pentium+n3540&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

Minimum price £223.40 and average is between £200 and £300
Yes you can find more expensive ones, but in convertibles which are always more expensive than traditional laptop form factor. Pure laptops with the N3540 are around that price.

Weird. I did the same search in US and the complete opposite numbers:

3556U - https://www.google.com/webhp?source...F-8#q=pentium+3556u&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

$299.99, $379.99, $380.98, $386.99, $386.99, $391.99...

N3540 - https://www.google.com/webhp?source...on=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=pentium+n3540&tbm=shop

$349.00, $529.99, $448.00, $1579.99, $499.99, $1269.99...

I don't think I would spend over $200 on either though.

In a very stupid twist, I can only find 11.6 inches Chromebooks with the 2957U. Hard to find Windows ones. Ridiculous.

I agree. I remember reading somewhere that the Celeron 2955U and 2957U would be specifically made for Chromebooks, and they scaled it back from Sandy Bridge ones in some way for this use case (maybe in an article about the Acer Chromebook C720 before it was released?). I do think I found one with Windows eventually though, surprisingly.

 

[waltchan]

Weird. I did the same search in US and the complete opposite numbers:

3556U - https://www.google.com/webhp?source...F-8#q=pentium+3556u&tbs=vw:l,p_ord:p&tbm=shop

$299.99, $379.99, $380.98, $386.99, $386.99, $391.99...

N3540 - https://www.google.com/webhp?source...on=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=pentium+n3540&tbm=shop

$349.00, $529.99, $448.00, $1579.99, $499.99, $1269.99...

I don't think I would spend over $200 on either though. .

Because the attractive "quad-core" word in Bay Trail than "dual-core" in Haswell worth more money, and brings more profit. Retailers are charging more for the Celeron N2940 than Celeron 2957U, and Pentium N3540 than Pentium 3558U at this moment. I know it's crazy. Intel got ya...

 

[ninaholic37]

Because the attractive "quad-core" word in Bay Trail than "dual-core" in Haswell worth more money, and brings more profit. Retailers are charging more for the Celeron N2940 than Celeron 2957U, and Pentium N3540 than Pentium 3558U at this moment. I know it's crazy. Intel got ya...

Yup. It's amazing how easily marketing fools the average buyer, I found this:

Yeah, I just assumed that it would be a decent speed (being a quad core).

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?p=37210588#post37210588

I wonder how many customers think like this? 8-core phones and Bulldozer come to mind too...

 

[Shivansps]

But there is a clear N on the number, if people learned to stay away from something that says "Atom" that can stay way from something with a N on the name, if someone has no idea of anything, its the same thing if its called Atom, Celeron, Pentium, or wharever.

I do agree about the prices being bad.

 

[waltchan]

But there is a clear N on the number, if people learned to stay away from something that says "Atom" that can stay way from something with a N on the name, if someone has no idea of anything, its the same thing if its called Atom, Celeron, Pentium, or wharever.

I do agree about the prices being bad.

The "N" won't help buyers. They have been lured in and tricked by Intel that these so-called "quad-core" Bay-Trail tablet Pentiums are extremely-fast and faster than their (let's say), old Sandy Bridge dual-cores they're replacing. Even the salespeople will say the same thing. I've heard this from many customers already whenever I'm at the computer section.

An "oct-core" (8-core) upcoming Airmont tablet processors (which is set to replace Silvermont) are in the works. This will get interesting in the computer department in around 2017 (8-core Pentium, 4000 total benchmark score, but with only 450 single-thread score). Frequency-speed will need to be reduced to 1.5 GHz in order to support the upcoming 6W TDP power. Intel promises only 6W TDP in Airmont vs. 7.5W TDP in Silvermont.

 

[Shivansps]

The "N" won't help buyers. They have been lured in and tricked by Intel that these so-called "quad-core" Pentiums are extremely-fast and faster than their (let's say), old Sandy Bridge dual-cores they're replacing. I've heard this from many customers already when I'm at the computer section.

An "oct-core" (8-core) upcoming Airmont tablet processors (which is set to replace Silvermont) are in the works. This will get interesting in the computer department in around 2017 (8-core Pentium, but with only 450 single-thread score). Frequency-speed will need to be reduced to 1.5 GHz in order to support the upcoming 6W TDP power. Intel promises only 6W TDP in Airmont vs. 7.5W TDP in Silvermont.

Again, if the N cant help them, nothing can, calling them Atoms and let them decide by the old atom user experience is not good either, these "Atoms" has nothing to do with the old Atoms.

And personally, ill pick the N3540 over any mobile SB Celeron or Pentium... except a B960 and up... for anything, even for games, at worse they are the same while using less power and maybe even fanless. But for a reemplacement? its not really good idea, unless its a forced reemplacement, or you need more run time.

 

[waltchan]

And personally, ill pick the N3540 over any mobile SB Celeron or Pentium... except a B960 and up... for anything, even for games, at worse they are the same while using less power and maybe even fanless.

Their Sandy-Bridge Celeron/Pentium laptops are turning 3-4 years old, so Pentium N3540 is going to be equivalent or better.

 

[ninaholic37]

Again, if the N cant help them, nothing can, calling them Atoms and let them decide by the old atom user experience is not good either, these "Atoms" has nothing to do with the old Atoms.

Maybe it's just me, but letters don't really do much for me. I naturally only think of quantity and performance by seeing Numbers. Possibly brand name too (ie. Atom vs. Pentium). The letter seems such a small insignificant thing, unless you keep remember to specifically look it and try to block everything else out of the equation. Is this how most normal people think? I never really paid attention to the N/J, but I do know that the letter comes before the number, unlike the U which comes after. Cryptic maybe, but it's the change that looks different enough that helps me tell more than having to remember the actual letters :awe:

 

[waltchan]

Thought I should bring this up regarding the desktop PC market in terms of entry-level models. Currently, the entry-level desktops are flooded with Celeron J1800 dual-core and J1900 quad-core at this moment, especially from Acer.

The previous processor for both was Celeron G470 2.0GHz Sandy Bridge. Today's new J1800 desktop sank more than 50% of single-thread speed vs. G470 in 2013.

Celeron J1800: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+J1800+@+2.41GHz

Celeron G470: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+G470+@+2.00GHz

 

[Shivansps]

Thought I should bring this up regarding the desktop PC market in terms of entry-level models. Currently, the entry-level desktops are flooded with Celeron J1800 dual-core and J1900 quad-core at this moment, especially from Acer.

The previous processor for both was Celeron G470 2.0GHz Sandy Bridge. Today's new J1800 desktop sank more than 50% of single-thread speed vs. G470 in 2013.

Celeron J1800: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+J1800+@+2.41GHz

Celeron G470: http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+G470+@+2.00GHz

Thats wrong, G470 was reemplaced by G16xx and then by G18xx. J1800 never had anything to do with it.

J1900 and J1800 reemplaced the ITX Atoms in desktop, like the D2550, needless to say that any of those is a huge improvement over the Cedar Trail Atoms, OEMs started to use it more because thats what OEMs do, its cheap, and it kinda performs, hell, the J1800 its not even the slower processor avalible today for desktop, thats the Sempron 2650.

Maybe it's just me, but letters don't really do much for me. I naturally only think of quantity and performance by seeing Numbers. Possibly brand name too (ie. Atom vs. Pentium). The letter seems such a small insignificant thing, unless you keep remember to specifically look it and try to block everything else out of the equation. Is this how most normal people think? I never really paid attention to the N/J, but I do know that the letter comes before the number, unlike the U which comes after. Cryptic maybe, but it's the change that looks different enough that helps me tell more than having to remember the actual letters :awe:

The thing is, its the best option, using numbers alone will make it very confusing, even for us, like a 3400 is a Atom, a 3600 is Haswell, thats a problem, you gona need to check each number to have an idea of what it is.

A brand name like Atom cant be used anymore in mobile, way too much bad PR.

And there all there is, the only better option is to, lets say, reserve the Celeron brand name for Atoms, and let the big core start at Pentium. But that the thing, Intel does not do that AT ANY LEVEL...

The N just marks it as a different family of products, just like the U does, the M does, etc... needless to say that a I3 M is better than a I5 U, a Celeron M is better than any Pentium U, etc.
If someone gona complain that a Celeron U is better than a Pentium N, you gona need to complain about every mobile lineup Intel has.

 

[waltchan]

Thats wrong, G470 was reemplaced by G16xx and then by G18xx. J1800 never had anything to do with it.

J1900 and J1800 reemplaced the ITX Atoms in desktop, like the D2550, needless to say that any of those is a huge improvement over the Cedar Trail Atoms, OEMs started to use it more because thats what OEMs do, its cheap, and it kinda performs, hell, the J1800 its not even the slower processor avalible today for desktop, thats the Sempron 2650.

No, G470 Sandy Bridge was part of Intel's low-power budget processors aimed for the entry-level because it's a solo-core processor, priced less than $219.99 (before J1800 came out). The Ivy Bridge G1620 was the next upgrade from G470, priced at $279.99 area. Figuring that the production cost of the G470 was too expensive, it was quickly discontinued and replaced with J1800, and then G1620 Ivy Bridge was replaced to G1820 Haswell.

So the cheapest got slower by up to 50% (G470 -> J1800), while the next cheapest become 10% faster (G1620 -> G1820).

For example, Dell i660s-775BK with G470, sold for only $199.99 in late-2013. It was replaced to (but inferior) i3646-1000BK model with J1800 somewhere in early-2014, and sales are over 70% higher than the previous model.

Today for the Celeron/Pentium group, we have this: J1800<J1900<J2900<G1840<G3240<G3440. Make sense.