• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Should Intel ditch "Celeron", or does it serve a purpose?

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
1 core 2 thread 2 ghz sandy bridge vs. 2 core 2 thread 2.58 ghz atom bay trail? i'll take the sandy pretty much in every situation.

make it a quad core atom bay trail and i might choose the netbook processor.


the problem with both celeron and pentium is that intel muddied the waters by selling both desktop and netbook based processors under those brands. if they'd have stuck with one processor type sold under each brand (say, pentium was always desktop derived 2 thread processors, either 1 or 2 cores, and celeron was netbook derived 2 or 4 cores), that would make sense. but they didn't. and there's a lot of overlap. N2920 celeron vs. N3510 pentium? i couldn't tell you which would be faster. the celeron has better graphics but gimpier memory. so maybe the pentium?
 
Last edited:
cbn said:
I would take the G470.
Click to expand...
Certainly. Some fond memories I remembered. Celeron G470 was added the last-minute in 2013 by Intel to fill-in the gaps for Black Friday 2013. Dell charged only $199.99. Majority of G470 PCs were sold during Black Friday day, and I wasn't able to obtain one. 🙁 I was only able to buy it as a retail box processor for $20 shipped (bought 5) when it was clearance out in June 2014 to make room for the refresh Haswells.

For non-Black Friday sale, Celeron G465 1.9GHz was common during mid-2013 and priced only $179.99, but only came with 2GB RAM. I currently have five units running in a daycare center that I maintain.

After Black Friday 2013, Celeron J1800/J1900 first appeared in February 2014, which replaced the G470 as Intel's new starter processor. Acer also experienced a skyrocket 300% greater amount of store returns than with G470 before, and since then, struggling to sell them as refurbs on eBay today.

Today, new starter desktops are at least 2.5 times slower with less-speed, and prices don't go down at all. Let's start with a AMD Beema E1-6010, or wait, how about Wally World's Acer Celeron N3050 special for $249.
 
Last edited:
frozentundra123456 said:
It will never happen, but I would like to see intel just move up everything one step:
i7 = mainstream hexcore (I can dream cant I)
i5 = quad with hyperthreading
i3 = quad, no hyperthreading
Pentium = dual, with hyperthreading
Celeron = dual, no hyperthreading
Click to expand...

I love it.... But we can only dream. I seriously doubt Intel will mainstream the hex core in the near future.
 
Phynaz said:
The Pentium Pro brand hasn't been used since 1995.
Click to expand...

True, but in regards to marketing -- it's still a great name. The Dart just popped up on the new Dodge compact sedan..... And that branding hadn't been used since 1976. Some words resonate well together for consumers, and IMO the term Pentium Pro has that same distinction.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
It will never happen, but I would like to see intel just move up everything one step:
i7 = mainstream hexcore (I can dream cant I)
i5 = quad with hyperthreading
i3 = quad, no hyperthreading
Pentium = dual, with hyperthreading
Celeron = dual, no hyperthreading

And quit calling atom celeron and pentium. Just call it atom or think up some new name altogether.
Click to expand...

I'd rather see Atom receive a big upgrade and have a quad minimum lineup.

i9 for LGA 2011 equivalent.
Everything below i3 becomes Atom. Remove Pentium and Celeron altogether.
 
MiddleOfTheRoad said:
True, but in regards to marketing -- it's still a great name. The Dart just popped up on the new Dodge compact sedan..... And that branding hadn't been used since 1976. Some words resonate well together for consumers, and IMO the term Pentium Pro has that same distinction.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Intel can revive the brand if it wants, no problem at all. They could even shoot a movie, appealing to a broader audience. Sort of, Bourne style ha. Live or die. The mother of all bombs 😎

I remember the Core campaign/propaganda in 2005/6, it was huuuuuge.
 
Haserath said:
I'd rather see Atom receive a big upgrade and have a quad minimum lineup.

i9 for LGA 2011 equivalent.
Everything below i3 becomes Atom. Remove Pentium and Celeron altogether.
Click to expand...

I think that we really need some octo core "i9" processors for high end gaming PC's, even if it's just something rebranded from the Xeon line. It's about time we get a new desktop CPU that's significantly faster than the prior generation.
 
ultimatebob said:
I think that we really need some octo core "i9" processors for high end gaming PC's, even if it's just something rebranded from the Xeon line. It's about time we get a new desktop CPU that's significantly faster than the prior generation.
Click to expand...

"i9" would be a terrible thing to introduce!

i3/i5/i7 work because it's a very simple "good/better/best" segmentation that's easy to remember. Adding i9 to the mix would make things a bit too complex, IMO.
 
Pentium and Celeron serve a purpose, and that is to dump crappy dies as needed. But I think it can also be a good place for Atom cores on an older node as well.

MiddleOfTheRoad said:
I love it.... But we can only dream. I seriously doubt Intel will mainstream the hex core in the near future.
Click to expand...

I actually am more optimistic about Cannonlake having more than 4 cores in the mainstream line now. The main reason is more because of their efforts in Mobile Xeons rather than anything else. OTOH, I think Intel is going to push "enthusiasts" (gamers) more towards the E line.
 
Useless. Had a G1840, dropped frames heavily on 720p/60 Youtube videos. Meh. Drop the mobo to a cheaper tier (H110) and buy an i3 minimum. Yes there is a noticeable difference.
 
Arachnotronic said:
"i9" would be a terrible thing to introduce!

i3/i5/i7 work because it's a very simple "good/better/best" segmentation that's easy to remember. Adding i9 to the mix would make things a bit too complex, IMO.
Click to expand...

Not really. It would be the "uber" option, that people that demand money-is-no-object would buy. I think that it would be the cash cow for Intel. Yes, it might take sales away from the i7, but I think Intel would be making more profit (higher ASPs) on the i9 CPUs then anyways.
 
escrow4 said:
Useless. Had a G1840, dropped frames heavily on 720p/60 Youtube videos. Meh. Drop the mobo to a cheaper tier (H110) and buy an i3 minimum. Yes there is a noticeable difference.
Click to expand...

What about non-K OC on the SKL Pentium? That would shut off the IGP anyways, so you would need a PCI-E GPU.
 
Arachnotronic said:
It's called i7 Extreme Edition:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117404&cm_re=5960x-_-19-117-404-_-Product
Click to expand...


But does it make sense, that Intel uses i7 for both the high-end of their mainstream CPU lineup, as well as their HEDT lineup? I don't think it does.

If Intel wants to move those people to their HEDT platform, from the mainstream, then IMHO they do need to do a branding change, to make the HEDT seem more desirable. A change to "i9" designation, could do that.
 
VirtualLarry said:
But does it make sense, that Intel uses i7 for both the high-end of their mainstream CPU lineup, as well as their HEDT lineup? I don't think it does.

If Intel wants to move those people to their HEDT platform, from the mainstream, then IMHO they do need to do a branding change, to make the HEDT seem more desirable. A change to "i9" designation, could do that.
Click to expand...

Meh, I think it would be too confusing to be honest.

May as well sell them as unlocked enthusiast Xeon chips...Xeon is a really cool sounding name.
 
Arachnotronic said:
"i9" would be a terrible thing to introduce!

i3/i5/i7 work because it's a very simple "good/better/best" segmentation that's easy to remember. Adding i9 to the mix would make things a bit too complex, IMO.
Click to expand...

The i7 brand is currently overextended, though. It currently covers everything from low voltage processors for laptops to high end gaming desktop parts. This new i9 would almost be like the "Extreme" processors from the past, and make it obvious that THIS is a the top of the line part that you'll want to lust after when it shows up on the cover if your PC gaming magazines.
 
VirtualLarry said:
Even if they could fit the single-core (with HT) in a 6-10W power envelope?
Click to expand...

My Celeron G465 used ~12W full load. So I suppose it's doable, especially with a two node advantage.

VirtualLarry said:
Not really. It would be the "uber" option, that people that demand money-is-no-object would buy. I think that it would be the cash cow for Intel. Yes, it might take sales away from the i7, but I think Intel would be making more profit (higher ASPs) on the i9 CPUs then anyways.
Click to expand...

Very well put.

waltchan said:
Single-thread speed dropped from 1003 in Celeron G470 to 554 in Celeron J1800 when it was replaced in early-2014 for the budget desktops. Which one would you take?
Click to expand...

Which is why I decided on the G465 in the first place. It also has a bigger IGP (6 vs 4EUs) compared with Bay Trail. I can assure you common 1080p playback was no problem at all. With very reasonable power consumption too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top