Why does Intel still make celeron?

[OVerLoRDI]

Celeron is cheap, solid no.

I also don't like the name Celeron. It sounds like celery.

Are you a friend of T_Yamato's?

But seriously, there are nonsense reasons for hating a product.

Also define solid as a reference to CPUs? I'm sure you aren't talking about reliability since that would be crazy.

 

[reb0rn]

If Intel unlock OC for celery it would blow AMD FX Buldozer any time

I would say 6Ghz for stock cooler

 

[piasabird]

So quit ranting and just spend more money for a better processor.

 

[teh_pwnerer]

Anandtech is missing to many CPUs on the benchmark. I bet a Pentium D 3.0ghz would crush a Sandy Celery.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

Anandtech is missing to many CPUs on the benchmark. I bet a Pentium D 3.0ghz would crush a Sandy Celery.

Which version? 90nm? Highly doubt it since I had it. And he can't review EVERY CPU

 

[T_Yamamoto]

So quit ranting and just spend more money for a better processor.

He's a self made millionaire. He should be able to afford something better

 

[CHADBOGA]

Anandtech is missing to many CPUs on the benchmark. I bet a Pentium D 3.0ghz would crush a Sandy Celery.

I replaced a friend's Pentium D 3.0Ghz system with a 2.6Ghz Sandy Celery system, and it was miles faster.

 

[teh_pwnerer]

I can buy any computer parts I want. But since you can't read I don't see a point explaining myself again.

This topic is about why the Celery is still produced when there are processors nearly as cheap but 4x better.

Anandtech needs to hire more people. Benchmark list is not complete that is inexcusable for a website of this caliber.

 

[T_Yamamoto]

I can buy any computer parts I want. But since you can't read I don't see a point explaining myself again.

This topic is about why the Celery is still produced when there are processors nearly as cheap but 4x better.

Anandtech needs to hire more people. Benchmark list is not complete that is inexcusable for a website of this caliber.

Why does anand need to hire more people? Why do we need to review low end CPUs? And I'm sure a lot of places don't have the celery on their list

 

[T_Yamamoto]

I replaced a friend's Pentium D 3.0Ghz system with a 2.6Ghz Sandy Celery system, and it was miles faster.

Because PD is 90nm and SB is 32nm. BIG difference.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Because PD is 90nm and SB is 32nm. BIG difference.

So what?

I never said otherwise, I was only addressing teh_pwnerer's comment.

 

[teh_pwnerer]

I replaced a friend's Pentium D 3.0Ghz system with a 2.6Ghz Sandy Celery system, and it was miles faster.

Hard to believe with a face like that in your avatar. I want the exact specs of that Pentium D.

 

[Yuriman]

Quoting myself, and it's not empty quoting.

A Sandy Bridge-based Celeron is still about 50% faster per clock than Brisbane. The G530 ($44 shipped on Amazon) is a hair faster than any "X2" branded chip. I'll accept that dual core Phenoms probably match or beat a Sandy Bridge Celeron, but it's not the slug you think it is.

A modern Celeron is very nearly an i3 without hyperthreading for most purposes. An i3 is not slow.

EDIT: Take a look on Anand's bench, compare the Pentium EE 955 to the Pentium G620.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Hard to believe with a face like that in your avatar. I want the exact specs of that Pentium D.

Ooops, my mistake, it was running at 2.66Ghz.

It was this beast.

 

[angevil]

OP you are a troll, but i will give you a few minutes of my time with the hope that you are redeemable. I am exactly what you are looking for , i used a Celeron G540 at 2.5ghz and i upgraded to an Ivy i3 3220.

Edit: when i talk about percentages in the next paragraphs, i talk when the performance is CPU limited. I know because i check with msi afterburner and i both downclock or overclock the gpu or increase/decrease msaa with no change in fps.

In games that use up to 2 cores like X3 albion prelude, Crysis 1, i got a 40% fps improvement in a CPU bottleneck scenes, which is expected. A 3.3ghz i3 ivy is equivalent to a 3.5ghz sandy celery, as the extra 1mb of cache and IPC improvement is less than a 10% boost at the same clocks, in single threaded workloads.

On games that use more than 2 threads, like Skyrim, Test drive unlimited 2, i got an average of 50% fps improvement when the bottleneck was the CPU.

On encoding with handbrake i get around 75% improvement in encoding time. Averaging everything i use the computer for, the increase in performance is at best 50%, as i am generous with that number because the increase in performance in games is visible only when the CPU was bottlenecking.

Also where i live a celery is almost 3 times as cheap as an ivy i3. Also i was getting good performance in games with my celery, for example the lowest in skyrim and tdu 2 was 30 fps. Now in those games with the ivy i3 the minimum i get is 45.

Like i said, those situations of boos in fps in games were only when the games were cpu limites. For example in skyrim, in the situations where the bottleneck was on the CPU, the fps increased by 50%, but overall, the average fps, is half that, maybe around 25% more fps.

So i paid over 2.5 times than what a celery costs, to get a 25% average increase in fps in games. For its performance and price and power consumption (which i was able to undervolt a lot too), a celery is a great deal. If my post did not prove you wrong, i don't know what will.

 

[billyb0b]

Why would anyone buy a Celeron. That name is like the devil.

I won't lie, the Celeron doesn't suck like it use to back in the day. But you can get a better AMD cpu than a Celeron for the price.

In terms of dual core for Intel it goes Celeron > Pentium > i3. i3 is nearly twice as much as the cheapest Celeron, but about 4x better.

Boo Celeron. :thumbsdown:

i'm running a sandy bridge celeron in a a mini-itx build in the kitchen. it's a dual-core, has igpu, and very low power use so low heat and low noise. it was a perfect solution.

celerons are still very capable CPUs for light use/office use, etc

 

[billyb0b]

Anandtech needs to hire more people. Benchmark list is not complete that is inexcusable for a website of this caliber.

so go somewhere else to find the benchmarks you are looking for. no one wants to hear your dreck

 

[Brunnis]

You almost certainly are a troll, but I'll give you the benefit of a doubt. Take a look at the test below. It has the Celeron G530, Pentium G620, i3 2100 and Athlon X2 250. As you can see, the Athlon stands no chance against either of the Intel chips. Anyway, more importantly the test shows that the difference between the Celeron and the i3 usually lies between 25 and 50 percent. The largest difference is around 70 percent.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/celeron-g540-g440_4.html

So, how can you claim that the i3 is four times faster? It's actually more like 50 percent faster, which makes the Celeron a better value.

Furthermore, the test above shows that the difference between the Celeron G530 and Pentium G620 is miniscule (the Pentium is up to to a few percent faster). This means that it's easy to use the G620 results in Anand's Bench to get an understanding of how the Celeron compares to other chips:

Vs Phenom II X2 565 BE: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/204?vs=406

The fastest Phenom X2 can just about keep up with the G620. The results wouldn't change if this was a Celeron. You're once again proven wrong, i.e. the Phenom does not crush the Celeron.

Vs Pentium EE 955: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/93?vs=406

One of the fastest Netburst based dual cores is completely wasted by the G620.

Vs Core 2 Duo E8400: http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/56?vs=406

The Pentium, and therefore also the Celeron, offers comparable performance to the high-end Core 2 Duo.

So, I've now shown that all of your claims of the Celeron offering grossly inferior performance are in fact wrong. The Celeron actually offers better price/performance ratio compared to the i3 and the i3 is usually not more than ~50 percent faster.

Can you offer an intelligent response that addresses why you think the above information is wrong? If you can't, then please don't even bother.