X-bit labs

Started by: Santa | Date 10/11/07

Comments: 21 | Last Comment:  02/02/08

[1-14]

1. cool, now amd needs dual core semprons

I prefer AMD single core CPUs at 2.2GHz/2.4Ghz than those crappy dual core celerons at 1.6Ghz.
Performance wise the single core completely crush the dual core CPU.

2. The deathknell of AMD

The only thing AMD has that low are Sempron and singlecore low end athlons.

3. Is this true? Am I dreaming a Celeron Dual Core for $35-50?

Now this shall be my main component for my WHS! :D

4. "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."

What do you mean ... you can already get AMD dual core chips for less than 60 bucks today. :) How can they go much cheaper, AMD is losing money on anything less than 65 bucks.

5. I wonder how it would overclock.

If AMD dropped there prices and made x2's in the $40 range that would be sweet too.

Either way this price war/ competition is great for buyers. I mean with all the latest price drop you could really build a sweet system for under $500.

Celeron L's are just core 2 duo's with one core and alot of l2 cache disabled, I belive they would overclock quite redily on 200mhz with a 8-9 multi ,expecialy with low heat and power requirments since they are singlecore/lower cache then their biger brothers. (think how well the Pentium Dual-Core and E4xxx series overclock.)

cheap motherboard overclocks
200x8=1600 (stock)
225x8=1800
250x8=2000
300x8=2400 (~300 being the limit/wall of the 945G (budget Core 2 Board) as I have been able to test.)

6. How about intruction supported? SSE 4? TXT? VT? Please give me at lease SS4 [-o

7. do people need dual core for less than $65. What does $20 make in difference for a consumer. You run the computer for a month and that's how much you will pay for electricity...

It makes a big difference to OEMs.
companies like gateway, dell, HP, etc... charge an average of 20-50% more per hardware.

So if you had a Pentium Dual Core computer, @ $500, and switch it to a Celeron Dual-Core, it would be about $350-450, that small of a price difference can be alot to some people, and nothing at all to others. But considering that pentium dual cores are ~70+, having a ~30-50 dual core can make a basic computer better(going from single core), and cheaper (as apposed to a more expensive cpu.)

8. And why would I want to buy such processors when we already have Pentium E2000 series?

Because others knows math better than you!

9. This is sweet, if true. AMD will have to follow suit. Dual core for $35, budget builders paradise....

10. Impressive product diversity

11. I'd like to see those celeron dual-core benched against AMD's lowest-priced alternative.

I think that Intel might stuck with so much product that it figures 'what the hell, let's just offer a dual-core celeron'

For intel, this is not about benchmarks for intel, its using two bad cores who's l2 may not be full-spec, and just turning em into dual-celys for the consumer.

No one that buys from bestbuy, circut city,etc... who know what "intel" is, will buy this becouse its cheap and dual core.


/end typing on a laptop while watching cops.

12. "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."

Well, I hope these processors have SpeedStep (EIST)...

Celerons typically don't have that, but they should support C1E and even if you idle at 1.6GHZ your not consuming much power vs full load.

13. Sounds nice except the TDP. A bit odd, in fact, that it's the same TDP as the higher end models, despite having lower clocks and much less cache.

It "fits" into the 65w TDP. So it can be much less.

14. What's next you ask? Quad core Celerons!

[1-14]