Why does Intel still make celeron?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
AMD Phenom II crush the Celeron.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/406?vs=204

Here is the Phenom II 565 BE vs. Pentium G620 (as a stand-in for the Sandy Bridge G530 Celeron)

Of course, realize if a celeron were used it would be slower due to the reduced L3 cache and slightly lower clockspeed. Still, it looks like the lower end Intel offerings do quite well compared to the old 45nm AMD dual cores.
 
Last edited:

teh_pwnerer

Member
Oct 24, 2012
151
0
0
The only reason I see to buy the Celery is if you were to do bulk orders for a company who needs office computers. Maybe some pre-built junky HPs with celeron chips.

The i3-2120 crushes the Celery and that cpu goes on sale often.

Celeron and Pentium need to be eradicated from the market.

Intel already has enough models of the i3. I mean come on jeeze.

Also I was talking about Phenom 945 and up. The true Phenom!

Saying Phenom just sounds so powerful too! Celeron = pathetic.
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,066
418
126
cheapest i3 is around $100,
cheapest celeron around $50...

sure intel could sell the i3 for $50, but at the end of the day, the Celeron and the i3 are based on the same thing, and Intel is trying to keep the more expensive CPUs attractive, so... pretty easy, Celeron, and Pentium helps to cover the lower prince range, and their different branding "protect" the image of the higher end products and help to differentiate...

I think there is a market for $50 CPUs, so, why not?

G530 is pretty decent for basic use, it's not much slower than a old higher end CPU (e8400)
 

Insert_Nickname

Diamond Member
May 6, 2012
4,971
1,695
136
I don't think a Celeron can even handle a 1080p video on youtube without the video and audio out of sync.

Please tell that to the Celeron G465 (single core with HT @ 1900MHz) in my "mini" media center. It handles youtube 1080p without any problems whatsoever. And according to perfmonitor the CPU usage is only ~15%...:D
 

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,066
418
126
Please tell that to the Celeron G465 (single core with HT @ 1900MHz) in my "mini" media center. It handles youtube 1080p without any problems whatsoever. And according to perfmonitor the CPU usage is only ~15%...:D


yep, youtube 1080p is not a big challenge for even the slowest Sandy Bridge CPUs, here is when I tested a Celeron B820 (1.7GHz but dual core), I also tested on a HDTV in 1080p and it looked OK

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WdSba80Zh0

my CPU usage was much higher, but I was using the laptop as it came from Gateway, so maybe it's software, GPU acceleration related? but even on my i3 desktop the CPU usage running that is around 10% (at 1.5GHz, but it's 10% from 4 "cores")
 
Last edited:

SPBHM

Diamond Member
Sep 12, 2012
5,066
418
126
My worst memories and experiences with Intel have to do with the name "Celeron".

yes, but it's just a name...
my experience with the SB celeron was good, with a northwood celeron was bad, with a coppermine celeron it was OK...
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,585
10,225
126
Pentium 4-era Celerons gave that brand a bad name, but today's Celeron chips are primarily just basic CPUs that are cheaper. That's all. They are fully capable (well, except for AES-NI, AVX, and QuickSync) processors.
 

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,444
5,810
136
It makes as much sense as disabling hyperthreading in i5's even though the transistors are still there, or having HD2500's and HD4000's coming from the same die as well. I'm willing to bet that the vast majority (if not all) of the tiered parts are tiered simply for pricing and are not actually harvested parts.

Things like disabling hyperthreading, locking off cores, lowering clock speeds and reducing graphics EU numbers are very different- those changes do not prevent the lower end chips from running software, they just reduce the speed at which they can run it. But disabling instruction set extensions locks them out of using entire applications. Not to mention that it is in Intel's best interests to encourage developers to use extensions like AVX more, and practices like this do the opposite of that.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
146
106
The benefit of the Celeron line is that people can choose what you want to pay for. The same reason why AMD/nVidia sells other GPUs than 650+/7700+.
 

pantsaregood

Senior member
Feb 13, 2011
993
37
91
I don't even see the Celery on Anandtech's Benchmark list. Where are these graphs being drawn up from?

AMD Phenom II crush the Celeron. I didn't say Sempron was any good, it's a poser as well.

Wrong, actually.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/406?vs=97

The Pentium G620 is identical to the Celeron G550. Everything in Intel's product line got refreshed around a year after Sandy Bridge was released. Pentiums got bumped up to new clock speeds, and Celerons assumed the speeds Pentiums had.

Needless to say, AMD isn't winning much here.

Also, disabling instruction sets isn't new. AMD disabled AMD64 on the first wave of K8-based Semprons. Intel disabled SSE 4.1 and SSE 4.2 on Penryn and Nehalem-based Pentiums/Celerons.
 

teh_pwnerer

Member
Oct 24, 2012
151
0
0
Why are you benchmarking an AMD X2 550. I mean who really bought that chip... No one. :thumbsdown:

Build a Celery system better than Q8200 for under $450 bux with no OS and try to impress me.
 

pantsaregood

Senior member
Feb 13, 2011
993
37
91
Why are you benchmarking an AMD X2 550. I mean who really bought that chip... No one. :thumbsdown:

Build a Celery system better than Q8200 for under $450 bux with no OS and try to impress me.

Because you said any Phenom II X2 would outperform a Sandy Bridge-based Celeron. Point being, you were wrong.

Also, since you mentioned a Q8200, I decided to check. The Celeron G550 actually holds up pretty damn well against it. The Q8200 wins more often than not, but the fact a $50 CPU wins anything pretty well shows that it doesn't suck.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/52?vs=406
 

teh_pwnerer

Member
Oct 24, 2012
151
0
0
Because you said any Phenom II X2 would outperform a Sandy Bridge-based Celeron. Point being, you were wrong.

Also, since you mentioned a Q8200, I decided to check. The Celeron G550 actually holds up pretty damn well against it. The Q8200 wins more often than not, but the fact a $50 CPU wins anything pretty well shows that it doesn't suck.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/52?vs=406
you are linking a Pentium not a Celeron.

Build me a better system for $450 with a gpu and prove me wrong. :thumbsup:

Not possible good sir.
 

teh_pwnerer

Member
Oct 24, 2012
151
0
0
The Pentium G620 is identical to the Celeron G550, aside from 1 MB less of L3 cache.

http://ark.intel.com/products/53418/Intel-Celeron-Processor-G550-(2M-Cache-2_60-GHz)
http://ark.intel.com/products/53480/Intel-Pentium-Processor-G620-(3M-Cache-2_60-GHz)

The cache difference has no observable affect on performance, though. That isn't even the fastest Celeron, either. The G560 is faster than that Pentium.
wow the Celery only supports ddr 1066? That's pathetic. Who would buy this joke of a chip!
 

T_Yamamoto

Lifer
Jul 6, 2011
15,007
795
126
Its cheap. Works. Does its job.

Why does OP asks some of the most non intelligent questions?
 

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,196
260
126
A dual core sandybridge celeron with a 128gb samsung ssd costs the same amount as an intel i3 yet for internet browsing and hd videos in h264 format or netflix the celly system will feel faster for the price
 

teh_pwnerer

Member
Oct 24, 2012
151
0
0
why in god's name are you morons feeding this troll?
The i3 crushes the Celeron. Celeron retails like $50 bux. The i3 goes on sale for $80.

Who wouldn't spend $30 more for a chip that DESTROYS the Celery in everything?

$30 is nothing. :thumbsup:
 

pantsaregood

Senior member
Feb 13, 2011
993
37
91
I have never seen an i3-3220 at $80. That's still almost twice as much as the Celeron costs, and it certainly isn't twice as fast. Even in absolutely absolutely conditions, the i3 won't perform more than 55% faster.

DDR3-1600 support is a non-issue. Any Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge CPU can run DDR3-1600. It doesn't improve performance at all, however.
 

teh_pwnerer

Member
Oct 24, 2012
151
0
0
I have never seen an i3-3220 at $80. That's still almost twice as much as the Celeron costs, and it certainly isn't twice as fast. Even in absolutely absolutely conditions, the i3 won't perform more than 55% faster.

DDR3-1600 support is a non-issue. Any Sandy Bridge/Ivy Bridge CPU can run DDR3-1600. It doesn't improve performance at all, however.
what are you talking about it says it doesn't support ddr 1600.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.