Specs on Intel Celeron Sandy Bridge CPUs Leaked

[exfileme]

More details have emerged regarding three new Sandy Bridge Celeron processors slated for Q3 2011.

Specs on Intel Celeron Sandy Bridge CPUs Leaked : Read more

 

[kjsfnkwl]

These look like they might be some nice chips to use for an HTPC, I'd like to see their MSRPs. I like how they brought back the "Celeron" series name.

Sort of off topic, but I think it would be cool if Intel named it's next series of processors "Pentium V"

 

[therealcold187]

Why do they waste time making these slow processors? Amd has this corner as they can't compete with the i5-2500k or the i7-2700k. AMD needs the slower market to stay in buisness as there graphic cards are great but there cpu are just to old and slow. I bet there gpu are faster then there cpu! LOL

 

[Darkerson]

Doubtful, they seem to have wanted to distance themselves from the Pentium name after the whole deal with the Pentium IV being crap near the end of its life compared to what AMD had at the time with the Athlon64, or at least thats how I look at it.

 

[therealcold187]

I buy Intel CPU and AMD Grapic cards so I don't hate AMD they just don't make good CPU any more. The last AMD processor I bought was a AMD Athlon XP 3200+ back when the P4 were crap but now Intel has left AMD in the dust and I see no chance of AMD coming back into the game.

 

[applegetsmelaid]

I always thought it was funny when people would call it the "exceleron"

 

[fullofzen]

I strongly doubt that they would bring back the Pentium name after all these years. It just sounds...old.

Celeron, on the other hand -- the line has a reputation for value performance at a low cost. Everyone understands -- or thinks they understand -- what they're getting.

I'm no branding expert, but that's my take on it...

 

[jednx01]

I'm more interested in what intel has coming down the pipe on the high end computing spectrum...

 

[fullofzen]

[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Bulldozer probably had a chance if it was released last summer. But now that Sandybridge is out with Sandybridge-E by the fall and Ivy is knocking on the door too AMD will never compete in the high end CPU market again. Bulldozer will already be at least one generation behind by the time it comes out.[/citation]

It will be exciting to see what actually ends up happening. I don't think that no one really has information on Bulldozer's performance -- I think most people that say Bulldozer will be a generation behind are saying that just because AMD's current line performs so poorly in comparison to Sandy Bridge.

I think it's just a bit too pessimistic to suggest that AMD doesn't know how to design chips just because Sandy Bridge has done so well. AMD can always come from behind -- just like they did with Athlon 64 -- and just like Intel did with Core 2.

Until the benches come out, anyone that makes statements like "Bulldozer will already be at least one generation behind by the time it comes out." is just pulling that assessment from the wild blue yonder...

 

[apache_lives]

[citation][nom]therealcold187[/nom]I buy Intel CPU and AMD Grapic cards so I don't hate AMD they just don't make good CPU any more. The last AMD processor I bought was a AMD Athlon XP 3200+ back when the P4 were crap but now Intel has left AMD in the dust and I see no chance of AMD coming back into the game.[/citation]

The 2.8C Intel P4 NORTHWOOD was better then that 3200+ you had at the time, hell the 2.4C even got some better results.

We all forget that although we are educated and aware of how crap the Pentium 4's and Pentium D's BECAME (the northwood was fine if anyone remembers this, prescott/smithfield/cedarmill etc is where it all went wrong with 90nm leakage), millions were still sold and thought highly of, the general public still bought more Intels and used them (alot of people still use them today).

 

[wild9]

[citation][nom]therealcold187[/nom]I buy Intel CPU and AMD Grapic cards so I don't hate AMD they just don't make good CPU any more. The last AMD processor I bought was a AMD Athlon XP 3200+ back when the P4 were crap but now Intel has left AMD in the dust and I see no chance of AMD coming back into the game.[/citation]
But AMD continues to sell these devices in volume, so they must be doing something right. Also, that Athlon XP 3200+ being your last AMD CPU..that's a really old product (I had a 3000+ too and recall trying to spread thermal paste on that tiny core lol). I'd recommend using a Phenom II. If the Phenom II is out the race, then so is Core 2/ i3/i5..because that's what it's competing with. Someone recently asked me to build them a GTA IV rig and the results show the Phenom II x4 was kicking some serious FPS, putting it near or even at the top of the pile and for a very good price.

Then there's AMD's longevity. The Phenom II is also compatible with old boards dating back to the AM2+ socket era, boards that have chipsets like the AMD 785G with it's very good multimedia capabilities. All this at a good price, allowing you to build a system on shoe-string, one that can easily cope with a lot of today's software demands.

People might slag off AMD, but it's AMD parts that drive the competition. I myself still use AMD products and have no reservations regarding performance, stability or power efficiency. I can get a board and choose from a wide variety of parts, from ultra-low power devices to 6-core monsters. All with minimal downtime. With clients, what I save in not splashing out on the latest Intel CPU's, I pass onto other areas: power supplies, memory and quality case fans.

I really don't see the point in rushing out to buy a controversial socket technology just because it's the fastest..it will no doubt be replaced by something that's faster. AMD may be competing on price more than it is with top-of-the-range performance, but I think that is playing it smart especially when you look at the great advances AMD has made in other areas such as GPU and APU technology. I know AMD is not the performance king, but neither are a lot of Intel systems..people still seem perfectly happy to use them I also think AMD is coming back in a big way, by developing several technologies rather than just focusing on one technology alone.

 

[captaincharisma]

man what a horrid line of CPU's why are they bringing them back. I though the I3 replaced the celeron line

 

[Guest]

i agree with wild9 amd keeps the market fair ..Yes they are behind alittle but that can change..The most interesting thing is the APU side if they put fast gpu's on there CPU's than they are really on a different level than intel..Besides the average user will never take full advantage of any current processor anyway..

 

[kjsfnkwl]

[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]man what a horrid line of CPU's why are they bringing them back. I though the I3 replaced the celeron line[/citation]
They aren't bringing back the actual chips, just the names.

 

[geekapproved]

Intel is releasing a single core, single thread cpu at 35 watts???

What's the point, the i3-2100T dual core w/hyperthreading is only 35w!!??

 

[senshu]

[citation][nom]apache_lives[/nom]The 2.8C Intel P4 NORTHWOOD was better then that 3200+ you had at the time, hell the 2.4C even got some better results.We all forget that although we are educated and aware of how crap the Pentium 4's and Pentium D's BECAME (the northwood was fine if anyone remembers this, prescott/smithfield/cedarmill etc is where it all went wrong with 90nm leakage), millions were still sold and thought highly of, the general public still bought more Intels and used them (alot of people still use them today).[/citation]
It had nothing to do with leakage, it had everything to do with Athlon being a superior architecture at the time. The 2.8 Northwood was not a better chip than the XP 3200, not by any stretch of the imagination. You are right that most of the general public still bought intel, though. Any enthusiast worth his salt was rockin' AMD until intel brought out that core 2 duo and blew them away.

 

[eddieroolz]

Gee, finally a low-end Intel CPU with VT-x. Took them long enough.

 

[dalauder]

AMD CPUs can't compete on high end, but an the Phenom II x4's for sale for $100 or something like that earlier this week is still a solid buy. AMDs may stay the way to go for OEM builds for a bit, especially as long as Llano provides all the graphics most people need.

And with hybrid crossfire capabilities so that a PCI-e card w/o a discrete connector can combine with integrated to provide affordable midrange graphics (maybe 5770 level?), AMD is still in the game. They can always reap the profits from mass sales and reenter the high-end game in 2014.

 

[dalauder]

[citation][nom]GeekApproved[/nom]Intel is releasing a single core, single thread cpu at 35 watts???What's the point, the i3-2100T dual core w/hyperthreading is only 35w!!??[/citation]Good point! That should be 20W. If it was 20W, they might actually have something useful developing there for low power devices.

 

[ivyanev]

They just want to sell their crappy dies instead of throwing them away.

 

[James296]

[citation][nom]wild9[/nom]But AMD continues to sell these devices in volume, so they must be doing something right. Also, that Athlon XP 3200+ being your last AMD CPU..that's a really old product (I had a 3000+ too and recall trying to spread thermal paste on that tiny core lol). I'd recommend using a Phenom II. If the Phenom II is out the race, then so is Core 2/ i3/i5..because that's what it's competing with. Someone recently asked me to build them a GTA IV rig and the results show the Phenom II x4 was kicking some serious FPS, putting it near or even at the top of the pile and for a very good price.Then there's AMD's longevity. The Phenom II is also compatible with old boards dating back to the AM2+ socket era, boards that have chipsets like the AMD 785G with it's very good multimedia capabilities. All this at a good price, allowing you to build a system on shoe-string, one that can easily cope with a lot of today's software demands.People might slag off AMD, but it's AMD parts that drive the competition. I myself still use AMD products have no reservations regarding performance, stability or power efficiency. I can get a board and choose from a wide variety of parts, from ultra-low power devices to 6-core monsters. All with minimal downtime. With clients, what I save in not splashing out on the latest Intel CPU's, I pass onto other areas: power supplies, memory and quality case fans.I really don't see the point in rushing out to buy a controversial socket technology just because it's the fastest..it will no doubt be replaced by something that's faster. AMD may be competing on price more than it is with top-of-the-range performance, but I think that is playing it smart especially when you look at the great advances AMD has made in other areas such as GPU and APU technology. I know AMD is not the performance king, but neither are a lot of Intel systems..people still seem perfectly happy to use them I also think AMD is coming back in a big way, by developing several technologies rather than just focusing on one technology alone.[/citation]

+1 for this

 

[vk_87]

They just need something to compete against the low cost Athlons/Semprons. Also, all those idiots who are "Intel is the best! AMD overheats" will continue to go for these! Yes, there are still some idiots who believe in that 'fake Intel PR'!

 

[silverblue]

[citation][nom]senshu[/nom]It had nothing to do with leakage, it had everything to do with Athlon being a superior architecture at the time. The 2.8 Northwood was not a better chip than the XP 3200, not by any stretch of the imagination. You are right that most of the general public still bought intel, though. Any enthusiast worth his salt was rockin' AMD until intel brought out that core 2 duo and blew them away.[/citation]

Not just that, but it took Intel's 2.8GHz+ chips to come close to equalling AMD's 2.2GHz chips. The P4s did very well at encoding plus anything that required huge amounts of bandwidth, but the Athlon XP and 64 had them beat in the majority of scenarios.

 

[mchuf]

[citation][nom]senshu[/nom]It had nothing to do with leakage, it had everything to do with Athlon being a superior architecture at the time. The 2.8 Northwood was not a better chip than the XP 3200, not by any stretch of the imagination. You are right that most of the general public still bought intel, though. Any enthusiast worth his salt was rockin' AMD until intel brought out that core 2 duo and blew them away.[/citation]

The general public didn't have many opportunities to buy pre-built pc's with AMD cpus. Just look at the deal between Dell and Intel. That will tell you everything you need to know about this. Yes, now Intel cpu's kill AMD's, but the Athlon's back then were world's better than Pentiums.

 

[Aravind Aarumugam]

I think that intel want's to get Amd's share of the lower end of the market because i see the name marketing directly aimed at the lower strata of processors.

The celeron branding was primarily used for entry level intel cpu's.

Anyone share the same views?