Intel to release dual-core Celeron E1000 on January 20

[daveybrat]

http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/35183/118/



Intel will release its first desktop dual-core Celeron series, E1000, on January 20, according to sources at motherboard makers. The first dual-core Celeron processor, the E1200, will have core frequency of 1.6 GHz, 800 MHz FSB and 512 KB L2 cache with a price of $53 in thousand-unit quantities

 

[BlueAcolyte]

hmm... that totally invalidates all single core offerings. Good. I wonder how it will overclock, considering they recently gave the celerons core 2 architecture.

 

[SickBeast]

My guess is that a cheap A64 X2 would destroy this chip for the same price.

512kb of L2 cache for 2 CPUs is not enough.

 

[GundamF91]

yeah, that's too low of L2 cache to do anything interesting, such as games or video. Probably be sold to business users.

 

[Goldfish4209]

That would probably sell in legions to offices and schools. It should be interesting to see what happens when someone trys it at 4Ghz. But the miniscule cache is probably gonna neuter it.

 

[SickBeast]

Didn't the old P4-based Celerons have 128kb of cache or something crazy like that?

I suppose in that sense, this chip is a step forward.

I agree that it should do alright in business apps, but really, so does any computer produced over the past 5+ years.

I don't see why they don't just make a single-core version with more cache instead.

 

[nonameo]

Wow, they are going to make bank on this seeing as how their processors are mostly cache nowadays.

 

[VirtualLarry]

At $53, that's too close to the price of an E2140 (1.6Ghz, $60). The lack of L2 cache is going to kill performance, if you have two threads going. I was hoping to see these chips around $40 ea. At that price, they would be worthwhile. You can get an X2 3800+ for $55, and that's a 2.0Ghz CPU. They overclock pretty well too (2.65Ghz easy on the one I just got).

 

[Bateluer]

There's barely a reason to buy a single core chip now, with the low end X2s cheap as dirt.

 

[tigersty1e]

I'm sorry, please educate me on what a celeron processor is?


What's the difference between the intel celeron and the intel core 2 duo?

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
My guess is that a cheap A64 X2 would destroy this chip for the same price.

512kb of L2 cache for 2 CPUs is not enough.

It's actually not that bad a performer, despite the lack of cache. Clock for clock, it is actually faster than K8, except for gaming where it falls slightly behind. You can see a 3GHz Celeron (single core) outpacing a 3.16GHz FX-57 at Xtremesystems: http://www.xtremesystems.org/f...howthread.php?t=148382

http://legionhardware.com/document.php?id=663

Here, you can see a 2GHz Celeron 440 (basically single core version of the upcoming DC Celerons) comprehensively beating a 2GHz Sempron 3600+ in CPU benchmarks, and coming very close in gaming. The Sempron would roughly be equal to a X2 3600+ in single threaded performance, so I suspect the Celerons will be very competitive with the low end X2 4000+ / 4200+, perhaps with the exception of gaming where the X2 should have a slight edge.

Apart from the low amount of cache, the other drawback of course is the low stock clockspeed, but I would imagine, like the rest of the Core 2 lineup, these chips have massive amount of overclocking headroom in them. With good cooling, a 100% overclock to 3.2GHz would not be out of the question, you have quite a few E2140's doing that already.

 

[zach0624]

I think for extreme budget builds this may help intel rival amd in that dept. The 512kb of cache will kill perf. on a intel dual core though since the 440 seems like a e2180 with one core removed you probably will see a drop of atleast 10% in perf. from the e2140 because of C2Ds hunger for cache, maybe 15%. Although in this market performance is not as big a deal as price.

 

[wwswimming]

Originally posted by: tigersty1e
I'm sorry, please educate me on what a celeron processor is?

something intel marketing came up with to describe a CPU
that's on a diet in terms of CPU horsepower ?

What's the difference between the intel celeron and the intel core 2 duo?

not much anymore, besides cache.

though the Celeron does have good interesting history -
wasn't the 300 MHz Celery a great OC'er, up to 450 ?

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Didn't the old P4-based Celerons have 128kb of cache or something crazy like that?

I suppose in that sense, this chip is a step forward.

I agree that it should do alright in business apps, but really, so does any computer produced over the past 5+ years.

I don't see why they don't just make a single-core version with more cache instead.

The Cedar Mill Cellys had 512mb of L2 cache and a fsb of 533MHz.

Crrrazee OC'ers - I think some Danes OC'ed one to 37GHz on liquid nitrogen

 

[Nemesis 1]

These celerons. Are exactly what the doctor ordered . As they give Intel a cost advantage in the lowend. Faster and more effcient than AMD has to offewr at Same price point. Gaming real world its like you boys say. AT high res. they are =.
Funny how intels low end cpu's and AMD's highend K10 may very well spell dome for AMD. After all is mike dell going to go for profitts on the lowend with intel. or give amd some charity slots in the pc lineup.

You guys are funny! Celorons have to suck with that amount of cache Right?

No sorry guys they do suck comparred to C2D but seem to match up rather well to X2 at the same clock.

Who would buy the PC with a celoron. Since they perform on par with X2 parts @ same clock. The ans . Is anyone who would buy a lowend PC. with x2 in them.

 

[nyker96]

at the 1/2 mb cache I think this thing will take a heavy hit in performance. but at 53 bucks, well probably like 60s with the etailer markup these days, it'll be a sempy killer.

 

[A554SS1N]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Didn't the old P4-based Celerons have 128kb of cache or something crazy like that?

I suppose in that sense, this chip is a step forward.

I agree that it should do alright in business apps, but really, so does any computer produced over the past 5+ years.

I don't see why they don't just make a single-core version with more cache instead.

The Cedar Mill Cellys had 512mb of L2 cache and a fsb of 533MHz.

Crrrazee OC'ers - I think some Danes OC'ed one to 37GHz on liquid nitrogen

That's one hell of a chip.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: A554SS1N

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Didn't the old P4-based Celerons have 128kb of cache or something crazy like that?

I suppose in that sense, this chip is a step forward.

I agree that it should do alright in business apps, but really, so does any computer produced over the past 5+ years.

I don't see why they don't just make a single-core version with more cache instead.

The Cedar Mill Cellys had 512mb of L2 cache and a fsb of 533MHz.

Crrrazee OC'ers - I think some Danes OC'ed one to 37GHz on liquid nitrogen

That's one hell of a chip.

You can power a small city - or aircraft carrier with one

And okayyyyy, it's 512kb

And Here is a Celly 360 @ 7.3GHz

and the Extreme Overclocking thread from OC Team Denmark . . . They post great pics of their workbench LN and dry ice coolers . . .

 

[darkxknight]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: A554SS1N

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Didn't the old P4-based Celerons have 128kb of cache or something crazy like that?

I suppose in that sense, this chip is a step forward.

I agree that it should do alright in business apps, but really, so does any computer produced over the past 5+ years.

I don't see why they don't just make a single-core version with more cache instead.

The Cedar Mill Cellys had 512mb of L2 cache and a fsb of 533MHz.

Crrrazee OC'ers - I think some Danes OC'ed one to 37GHz on liquid nitrogen

That's one hell of a chip.

You can power a small city - or aircraft carrier with one

And okayyyyy, it's 512kb

And Here is a Celly 360 @ 7.3GHz

and the Extreme Overclocking thread from OC Team Denmark . . . They post great pics of their workbench LN and dry ice coolers . . .

how in the world u get multiplier of 26?

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: darkxknight

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: A554SS1N

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Didn't the old P4-based Celerons have 128kb of cache or something crazy like that?

I suppose in that sense, this chip is a step forward.

I agree that it should do alright in business apps, but really, so does any computer produced over the past 5+ years.

I don't see why they don't just make a single-core version with more cache instead.

The Cedar Mill Cellys had 512mb of L2 cache and a fsb of 533MHz.

Crrrazee OC'ers - I think some Danes OC'ed one to 37GHz on liquid nitrogen

That's one hell of a chip.

You can power a small city - or aircraft carrier with one

And okayyyyy, it's 512kb

And Here is a Celly 360 @ 7.3GHz

and the Extreme Overclocking thread from OC Team Denmark . . . They post great pics of their workbench LN and dry ice coolers . . .

how in the world u get multiplier of 26?

Buy one. The Celly D 365 at 3.6GHz has a multiplier of 27.

 

[Phynaz]

One chip that wipes out the entire Sempron line, and probably half of the X2 line in the near future.

Wow.

 

[harpoon84]

Originally posted by: Phynaz
One chip that wipes out the entire Sempron line, and probably half of the X2 line in the near future.

Wow.

It spells the end for single core CPUs, yes, but how does it 'wipe out' half the X2 line?

 

[piasabird]

Still using a 1.2 Gig Tulatin Core Celron with 256k of L2 Cache. Seems to run pretty good to me. The processor is not everything. Some games are less affected by the processor than the video card anyway.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: piasabird
Still using a 1.2 Gig Tulatin Core Celron with 256k of L2 Cache. Seems to run pretty good to me. The processor is not everything. Some games are less affected by the processor than the video card anyway.

Yeah, but which blazing fast 4x AGP card are you playing Crysis with?

 

[Phynaz]

Originally posted by: harpoon84

Originally posted by: Phynaz
One chip that wipes out the entire Sempron line, and probably half of the X2 line in the near future.

Wow.

It spells the end for single core CPUs, yes, but how does it 'wipe out' half the X2 line?

These may be faster than X2 clock for clock. What happens when Intel releases these in the area of 2.6 Ghz?