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

[Face]

X-Bit Labs

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.

[perkam]

Ty AMD

Perkam

[Ashraf]

$5 - $10 in 2010.

[Sparky]

$5 - $10 in 2010.

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.

[knightwolf654]

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

[K404]

Free in cereal boxes before too long!!

[knightwolf654]

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

[naokaji]

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?

[nemrod]

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...

[mAJORD]

Disabled cache, no? (same die size)

[triple_A]

Darn, 35bucks. That's even less than a second hand pentium4 or athlon XP goes for.

[dieqast]

Can anyone tell me when 45nm Celly's are scheduled? That would be SFF-dream .

[`danny]

I might just pic a few up just for a backup incase I ever upgrade my cpu

[hecktic]

Ty AMD

Perkam

lol so true yet funny

[Shintai]

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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[Epsilon84]

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.

[Kingcarcas]

Woot! How long before single cores are no longer produced?

[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.

[Epsilon84]

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?

[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.

[MaSell]

Quad celly will be nice option, 2MB for 4 cores, and price like for low/middle end c2d

[Pinnacle]

nice web surfing rigs with these