Celeron N2840 2.16GHz Bay Trail vs. Celeron N3050 1.60GHz Braswell single-thread...

[waltchan]

It will perform somewhat similar to the AMD E1 2100, yeah, that monocore piece of trash.

Actually worse than E1-2100, which is at 364. E1-2100 is a notebook processor with bigger cores than Celeron N3000 tablet processor. Fortunately, Celeron N3000 turbo-boost at 2.08GHz will catch it up.

 

[dark zero]

Actually worse than E1-2100, which is at 364. E1-2100 is a notebook processor with bigger cores than Celeron N3000 tablet processor. Fortunately, Celeron N3000 turbo-boost at 2.08GHz will catch it up.

Sadly, Burst doesn't last long despite the refrigeration, it's the difference against Turbo. Also that E1 is not a notebook processor, it's a tablet one and to make it worse most chips are defective A6

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yea, i definitely think the went the wrong direction putting so much emphasis on the gpu. I have a cheap BT tablet, and if i wanted anything improved, it would be the cpu performance, not gpu. Hopefully they will bring out higher clocked CT chips eventually.

 

[waltchan]

Also that E1 is not a notebook processor, it's a tablet one and to make it worse most chips are defective A6

A4, A6, A8, A10, E1, and E2, doesn't matter what it is, they're all embedded notebook processors with bigger cores than Bay Trail, despite same physical size.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_FP3

E2-6110 1.50GHz is clocked lower than Celeron J1900 2.00GHz, yet E2-6110 is rated 50 points higher on single-thread than J1900, which means it has bigger cores than J1900. All the Bay Trails have tiny cores, high-speed embedded tablet processors, cheaper build quality, and weaker performance.

To keep things simple, E1-2100 1.00GHz will act almost 2 times faster than Celeron N1000 (if available) rated at 1.04GHz locked with no turbo burst available. Celeron N1000 would be equivalent to Pentium III 850MHz.

 

[dark zero]

A4, A6, A8, A10, E1, and E2, doesn't matter what it is, they're all embedded notebook processors with bigger cores than Bay Trail, despite same physical size.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socket_FP3

E2-6110 1.50GHz is clocked lower than Celeron J1900 2.00GHz, yet E2-6110 is rated 50 points higher on single-thread than J1900, which means it has bigger cores than J1900. All the Bay Trails have tiny cores, high-speed embedded tablet processors, cheaper build quality, and weaker performance.

To keep things simple, E1-2100 1.00GHz will act almost 2 times faster than Celeron N1000 (if available) rated at 1.04GHz locked with no turbo burst available. Celeron N1000 would be equivalent to Pentium III 850MHz.

Actually the E2-6110 has more instructions supported than the J1900

 

[Shivansps]

The E1-1200 and 2100 are notebook SoCs, the tablet SoC was the Z-60, then the A4-1200, and now the Mullin "Micro" Series starting from E1 Micro-6200T, and problably to be reeplaced by AMD K12 ARM parts, since Carrizo-L tdp is too high.

The thing is, what you are comparing is nonsence, its like saying a Pentium G3260 is better than anything AMD has in the FX and APU desktop line just because it has better ST perf, this is not longer Win 98 era.

And yes, the E2-6110 is better than a J1900, BT (and CT) core IPC is lower than AMD Small Cores IPC, kinda strange scenario, but it is like that.

 

[dark zero]

The E1-1200 and 2100 are notebook SoCs, the tablet SoC was the Z-60, then the A4-1200, and now the Mullin "Micro" Series starting from E1 Micro-6200T, and problably to be reeplaced by AMD K12 ARM parts, since Carrizo-L tdp is too high.

The thing is, what you are comparing is nonsence, its like saying a Pentium G3260 is better than anything AMD has in the FX and APU desktop line just because it has better ST perf, this is not longer Win 98 era.

And yes, the E2-6110 is better than a J1900, BT (and CT) core IPC is lower than AMD Small Cores IPC, kinda strange scenario, but it is like that.

Sounds weird, but in lower tiers, AMD and even nVIDIA and VIA wins, but in higher ones Intel crushes them

 

[Shivansps]

Im no so sure, i whould pick any device with a BT or CT Tablet processor over the E1 Micro-6200T whiout even looking a benchmark, the A4 Micro 6400T is good, but at 4.5W TDP it just cant maintain clocks, thats the thing about BT and probably about CT too, BT can mantain full CPU turbo i tested myselft a N3540 and a Z3735F and at least they can maintain full CPU turbo for an hour, what they cant do is maintain cpu+igp, CPU turbo are disabled as soon you start using the IGP and even still they can maintain that for long, probably the main reason of why CT gaming is not that much better than BT.

So yeah, those AMD tablet CPU may look good in a benchmark, but they just cant maintain CPU clocks for long in real use, and BT can, remember that.

Anyway, all those CPU are pure crap for ANY use... the only good small core from AMD right now is the A8-6410, now thats an EXCELENT SoC! And its an small core, and its the only small core i whould buy today, but its so much close in price to the big core A8-7100.

 

[Abwx]

Anyway, all those CPU are pure crap for ANY use... the only good small core from AMD right now is the A8-6410, now thats an EXCELENT SoC! And its an small core, and its the only small core i whould buy today, but its so much close in price to the big core A8-7100.

6310 is not much different from a 6410, and often boost as high with the 4 cores, depend of the laptop brand.

Also those can be find starting at 260€ in Germany for instance due to being phased out.

https://geizhals.de/?cat=nb&xf=6749_9&sort=p

Replacements will start at 4C/1.8 wich will render the whole line much better than any BT/CT, set apart for a 2C/1.5 that is curiously still integrated in the Carrizo-L line...

 

[dark zero]

Im no so sure, i whould pick any device with a BT or CT Tablet processor over the E1 Micro-6200T whiout even looking a benchmark, the A4 Micro 6400T is good, but at 4.5W TDP it just cant maintain clocks, thats the thing about BT and probably about CT too, BT can mantain full CPU turbo i tested myselft a N3540 and a Z3735F and at least they can maintain full CPU turbo for an hour, what they cant do is maintain cpu+igp, CPU turbo are disabled as soon you start using the IGP and even still they can maintain that for long, probably the main reason of why CT gaming is not that much better than BT.

So yeah, those AMD tablet CPU may look good in a benchmark, but they just cant maintain CPU clocks for long in real use, and BT can, remember that.

Anyway, all those CPU are pure crap for ANY use... the only good small core from AMD right now is the A8-6410, now thats an EXCELENT SoC! And its an small core, and its the only small core i whould buy today, but its so much close in price to the big core A8-7100.

Actually those BT can't maintain the clocks either... that's a big problem from them.

 

[waltchan]

Actually those BT can't maintain the clocks either... that's a big problem from them.

Bay Trail needs to be overclocked at 3.80GHz to match Celeron 2957u 1.40GHz Haswell.

 

[Shivansps]

Actually those BT can't maintain the clocks either... that's a big problem from them.

They can, CPU use only.

 

[waltchan]

Upgrading to Windows 10 right now with Celeron N2840 Acer laptop, and its single-thread installation speed runs like CRAP right now. D:

 

[waltchan]

Upgrading to Windows 10 right now with Celeron N2840 Acer laptop, and its single-thread installation speed runs like CRAP right now. D:

Took 8 hours to download and install Windows 10 completely for me, and it's now up and running. Maybe it's because it only has 2GB RAM installed. My next PC with Celeron G470 is next to get Windows 10, and we'll see how it goes.

 

[Cakefish]

Took 8 hours to download and install Windows 10 completely for me, and it's now up and running. Maybe it's because it only has 2GB RAM installed. My next PC with Celeron G470 is next to get Windows 10, and we'll see how it goes.

Possibly. I just got an Acer Aspire ES1-131 and did the upgrade. Took about 1 hour all in all with 8GB of RAM installed.

 

[Faenad]

I didn´t realize it at the time, but the 14" Lenovo B490 was purchased 10 months ago (it was already old) was a steal.

USD $250 for a 1005M (Passmark 1890, also the best graphics in its class - 650 MHz up to 1Ghz).
Free Msata Slot (now with a 128GB SSD.
DVD writer.
2 Sodimm (upped from 2GB to 4 first then 8GB)
500GB HDD, now replaced with 1TB, switched the laptop HDD with the external HDD).

The CPU is 35W, but the battery is bigger, I used to get 5H out of it before Windows 10, now 3H30. I still have to look into this.
I even got a HM77 motherboard, so I can switch the CPU for an i5-3210m later if I can find a cheap one and get double the performance.

It is certainly heavy compared to the N2840 laptops, but If I have to compromise on something it certainly would be the weight

Now to get something that is not slower I´m looking at at least USD400.
As several posters have said, I have to go for the i3.
There is a big performance gap between the crappy N2840 and the i3.
There is no such a price gap, you just find "nicer" N2840 laptop with more memory etc. until approaching the first i3 units.

The N2840 is a very bad experience, I have seen it lags on a clean fresh install for opening basic program like office Chrome etc. And it seems now its getting to get worse.

 

[Faenad]

It´s very disappointing and I think it would be worthwhile for Anandtech to look into it and point some fingers. I haven´t seen it mentioned nowhere, I was just quoting some cheap laptop for a school tonight, happily saw some new N3050 SKU and found this thread while investigating. Set myself up for some false hope as you already know.

In a lot of markets these laptop are what most people can afford and they are getting basically fleeced, this is the moore law reversed.

I don´t know if AMD has something in this price range that could be an alternative, as far as I have see they are even worse but alas manufacturer tends to push the worse that AMD have to offer.

 

[ninaholic37]

The N2840 is a very bad experience, I have seen it lags on a clean fresh install for opening basic program like office Chrome etc. And it seems now its getting to get worse.

I don't think Chrome and Office are "basic" programs. Maybe Notepad or a Picture Viewer or a Music player. But I guess you meant basic as in "what you think everyone needs" and not as in "light". Bloated programs like Office and Chrome do tend to run slow on low end hardware though, I would look for lighter alternatives for anything Atom based like you said.

 

[TeknoBug]

MS Office does not play nice on a system lower than a Pentium N3530 or J1900. I've used a Celeron N2940 before but didn't try stuff like Office on it. It runs like ass on my A4 5000 laptop. Come to think of it- I'm going to try it on my Z3775 tablet... I have seen ads of Z37** tablets bundled with Office 2013.

LibraOffice on the other hand, runs fine even on a low end system and handles Office docs pretty well.

 

[Cakefish]

I'm running Office 2016 preview and it's running pretty fine on my Celeron N3050. Windows 10 64bit.

The improved GPU really helps in rendering fonts and pictures and whatnot.

 

[waltchan]

Benchmark score finally released on Braswell Celeron N3150 quad-core, with only 372 single-thread score (ouch) :

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+N3150+%40+1.60GHz

Compare to Bay Trail Celeron N2940 quad-core previous model with 508 single-thread score:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+N2940+@+1.83GHz

Also, Bay Trail Celeron J1900 quad-core for desktops at 527:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+J1900+@+1.99GHz

Who's ready for 372 single-thread Braswell score? :whiste: From 2013 Celeron G470 at 992 to 2016 Celeron N3150 at 372, what a wonderful way to celebrate your computer, right?.

Second sample user finally in on Celeron N3150 Braswell's benchmark score, and it's still stuck at 372 single-thread score area. It's E1-2100 all over again. So, run out and grab all the Bay Trails if you can.

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+N3150+@+1.60GHz

 

[Cakefish]

I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss Braswell. Much better battery life and much better GPU performance.

How can I test the single threaded performance of my N3050? Which benchmark should I try?

 

[ninaholic37]

How can I test the single threaded performance of my N3050? Which benchmark should I try?

I would love to see your score on CPUmark99 (no Braswell scores there yet):

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2057154

 

[Cakefish]

Here's the results. As you can see, the N3050 is actually faster than the N3150 in single-threaded workloads and equal to Bay Trail. Maybe something to do with the fact that it's a dual core at 6W TDP instead of quad core at 6W TDP?

 

[dave_the_nerd]

N2840 - http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/search?utf8=✓&q=N2840

N3050 - http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/search?utf8=✓&q=N3050

The newer one's slower, but with speeds that low, I'd call either one a pass.