Intel Preps $35 - $50 Dual-Core Celeron's for Q1 2008

Printable View

10-12-2007, 01:39 AM
Face

Intel Preps $35 - $50 Dual-Core Celeron's for Q1 2008

X-Bit Labs

Quote:

Intel Readies Dual-Core Microprocessors for $35 - $50

It was just a matter of time before the leading makers of central processing units (CPUs) start to sell dual-core chips for value computers and it now seems that the time will come in the first quarter of next year, when Intel Corp. unveils dual-core Intel Celeron microprocessors aiming at the most affordable personal computers (PCs).

The first Intel Celeron E1200 dual-core processor working at 1.60GHz, utilizing 800MHz processor system bus and featuring 512KB of unified secondary-level cache will emerge in the first quarter of 2008 to target cost-effective desktops. Later during the year Intel plans to add more chips into the Intel Celeron E1000 dual-core lineup, creating a comprehensive family of affordable chips with two processing engines.

Intel’s Celeron E1000 dual-core processors are set to be made using 65nm process technology and are projected to fit into 65W thermal design power envelope. The new CPUs will be drop-in compatible with all platforms that support code-named Conroe processors, e.g. Intel Core 2 Duo or Intel Pentium dual-core E2000-series.

Given relatively low clock-speed and not a large cache, it is unlikely that Intel Celeron E1000 dual-core microprocessors will show incredible performance. Nevertheless, the forthcoming emergence of the new chips proof that multi-core technology are rushing into the value segment of the market.

The launch of low-cost dual-core Intel Celeron E1000-series processors will cause the chip giant’s rival Advanced Micro Devices to either waterfall prices of its entry-level single-core AMD Athlon LE and AMD Sempron chips, or to introduce value dual-core processors as well and reconsider pricing of single-core offerings.

Got it off Winbeta.
10-12-2007, 02:00 AM
perkam

Ty AMD :up:

Perkam
10-12-2007, 02:23 AM
Ashraf

$5 - $10 in 2010. :p:
10-12-2007, 02:31 AM
Sparky

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashraf

$5 - $10 in 2010. :p:

In 2010 I don't think anyone would really want today's dual cores ;) Let alone a celeron!

Not sure what the purpose of a dual-core celeron is - maybe make the people who buy those $300 dell specials feel like they are in the 21st century?
Celeron is a celeron, wimpy. IMO.
10-12-2007, 02:35 AM
knightwolf654

agreed, this war continues to get better :)
soon it will be $75 quad cores :D
10-12-2007, 02:37 AM
K404

Free in cereal boxes before too long!!
10-12-2007, 02:38 AM
knightwolf654

dont forget cracker jacks!
but in all seriousness this is kinda pointless i doubt intel is make any profit of these
10-12-2007, 02:51 AM
naokaji

Quote:

Originally Posted by knightwolf654

dont forget cracker jacks!
but in all seriousness this is kinda pointless i doubt intel is make any profit of these

but thats the price point amd is selling its cpu's at (in high numbers)... the higher priced ones are just decoration... or what do you think why so many oem's actually use cheap a64's?
10-12-2007, 03:03 AM
nemrod

Quote:

Originally Posted by knightwolf654

but in all seriousness this is kinda pointless i doubt intel is make any profit of these

Why? There is nearly no cache vs classical conroe, so die size and transistors count is far less. I don't see why there will be no or even less profit... :shrug:
10-12-2007, 03:39 AM
mAJORD

Disabled cache, no? (same die size)
10-12-2007, 03:41 AM
triple_A

Darn, 35bucks. That's even less than a second hand pentium4 or athlon XP goes for.
10-12-2007, 03:52 AM
dieqast

Can anyone tell me when 45nm Celly's are scheduled? That would be SFF-dream ;).
10-12-2007, 03:56 AM
`danny

I might just pic a few up just for a backup incase I ever upgrade my cpu :)
10-12-2007, 04:03 AM
hecktic

Quote:

Originally Posted by perkam

Ty AMD :up:

Perkam

lol so true yet funny :ROTF: :rofl: :clap:
10-12-2007, 04:11 AM
Shintai

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparkyJJO

In 2010 I don't think anyone would really want today's dual cores ;) Let alone a celeron!

Not sure what the purpose of a dual-core celeron is - maybe make the people who buy those $300 dell specials feel like they are in the 21st century?
Celeron is a celeron, wimpy. IMO.

Celerons and Semprons account for about 30-35% of the total sales. Also these chips are way overpowered in most office computers and for the parents and others that just surf and read email.
10-12-2007, 04:23 AM
Epsilon84

1.6GHz only?! That's err... pretty darn slow, fittingly for a Celeron I guess. :p

If these can overclock to ~3GHz it might actually be a pretty good deal for budget overclockers though.
10-12-2007, 05:02 AM
Fixxxer

LOL, some of you take it as something bad.

It's good. Now peepz who want a cheap proc won't have to buy an AMD.
10-12-2007, 05:07 AM
RPGWiZaRD

Intel sure is teasing AMD a lot these days but I like the idea about making single core CPUs obsolete so developers of software don't have any reason not to provide multicore support.
10-12-2007, 04:25 PM
Epsilon84

Quote:

Originally Posted by MR_SmartAss

2.67GHz(8x333) would be impressive. But don't expect a good scaling in performance with the frequency. The small L2 would punish the performance of these chips, so at 2.67GHz I guess it would perform like a same clocked K8 X2.

Indeed, the lack of cache will hit these Cellys hard, I only expect them to be roughly equal with K8 in IPC.

However, a $35 -$50 chip that can hopefully hit ~3GHz or close to it would be pretty darn tempting for a lot of budget overclockers. The 800FSB means it's good for overclocking with el cheapo RAM too. :up:
10-12-2007, 04:43 PM
Kingcarcas

Woot! How long before single cores are no longer produced? :clap:
10-12-2007, 05:08 PM
Reznik Akime

Hopefully it will come down to that. No more single core so devs will be more inclined to multithread.

And why are so many knocking K8s anyway? They are still pretty good contenders.
10-12-2007, 05:25 PM
Epsilon84

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reznik Akime

Hopefully it will come down to that. No more single core so devs will be more inclined to multithread.

And why are so many knocking K8s anyway? They are still pretty good contenders.

I don't think anyone is knocking K8, but if a $35 Celeron can overclock to similar levels to a $60 Brisbane that can only be a good thing right? :up:
10-12-2007, 05:39 PM
Reznik Akime

Eh, I suppose.

Hell, I'm the kind of person who goes with the most performance per dollar anyway. If these Cellys could go toe to toe with a K8, they would make hellishly cheap crunchers.
10-12-2007, 05:42 PM
MaSell

Quad celly will be nice option, 2MB for 4 cores, and price like for low/middle end c2d :D
10-12-2007, 05:43 PM
Pinnacle

nice web surfing rigs with these
10-12-2007, 06:00 PM
dinos22

Quote:

Originally Posted by perkam

Ty AMD :up:

Perkam

you're not wrong there :)
10-12-2007, 06:05 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by SparkyJJO

In 2010 I don't think anyone would really want today's dual cores ;) Let alone a celeron!

Not sure what the purpose of a dual-core celeron is - maybe make the people who buy those $300 dell specials feel like they are in the 21st century?
Celeron is a celeron, wimpy. IMO.

The Celeron 420 is the fastest single core CPU ever produced, it beats an FX-57 at almost every bench...
10-12-2007, 06:09 PM
MaSell

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor22

The Celeron 420 is the fastest single core CPU ever produced, it beats an FX-57 at almost every bench...

I think that Celeron 480 (14x200) is "little" faster:D
10-12-2007, 06:27 PM
Cracker

I want quad-core Celery! :)
10-12-2007, 07:09 PM
RAW-Raptor22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cracker

I want quad-core Celery! :)

Nat for a few more years.... :rofl:
10-12-2007, 07:25 PM
bypolar

Celerons are a dead name in the market these days. Unless intel does something just like this.

good to see they are moving all the market platforms ahead just means AMD will release a multi core sempron some time soon hopefully.
10-12-2007, 08:29 PM
xlink

can't they just make a 2mb l2 cache single core celeron with hyperthreading for around $50?
those'd perform better and be cheaper to make
10-13-2007, 12:07 AM
ziddey

c2d seems to scale appropriately downwards from 4mb to 2mb to 1mb. but 512k? another willamette??
10-13-2007, 12:25 AM
Epsilon84

Quote:

Originally Posted by ziddey

c2d seems to scale appropriately downwards from 4mb to 2mb to 1mb. but 512k? another willamette??

I doubt it. All things considered it should be about on par with K8 IPC wise. So unless you wanna suggest K8 is a Willamette... ;)
10-13-2007, 12:27 AM
xlink

Quote:

Originally Posted by Epsilon84

I doubt it. All things considered it should be about on par with K8 IPC wise. So unless you wanna suggest K8 is a Willamette... ;)

well in a lot of things the pentium dual cores loose to the K8s when it comes to performance/clock so basically...

they're celerons... CELERY
10-13-2007, 05:08 AM
Epsilon84

Quote:

Originally Posted by xlink

well in a lot of things the pentium dual cores loose to the K8s when it comes to performance/clock so basically...

they're celerons... CELERY

???

In the reviews I've seen, the Pentium Es have around a 10% edge in IPC over K8.

Considering Conroe-Ls have been benched against an FX-57 and come out on top clock for clock (just) I don't see how a dual core version would fail to match the IPC of K8?
10-13-2007, 05:25 AM
Jacky

oh and don't forget their much more advanced SSE abilites and nice overclockability. :)
10-13-2007, 05:55 AM
Den Leiw

Well now if they released those Celerons for Socket 478, I could happily update my old Pentium IV rig :D
10-13-2007, 08:06 AM
The_Beast

Quote:

Originally Posted by knightwolf654

agreed, this war continues to get better :)
soon it will be $75 quad cores :D

:drool: I wish :drool: