1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

New Intel Dual-core Celeron Coming in 2Q08

Discussion in 'News' started by malware, Jan 21, 2008.

  1. malware New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,476 (1.49/day)
    Thanks Received:
    956
    Location:
    Bulgaria
    Having recently launching its first dual-core Celeron E1200 processor, Intel is ready to launch another family member with a faster core frequency in the second quarter of 2008. Intel is planning to launch E1400 with a core frequency of 2GHz, 800MHz FSB, L2 cache of 512KB, and maximum TDP of 65W. The chip is based on a 65nm Conroe core and supports Intel 64, XD Bit (Execute Disable Bit) and Speed Step technology. Pricing will be set at US$53 in a thousand-unit tray quantities. In the first quarter of 2008, Intel will let the dual-core Celeron E1200 and single-core Celeron 440, 430 and 420 defend the entry-level segment, while in the second quarter, the company will let the Celeron E1400, 440 and 430 continue the job, while phasing out the E1200 and 420. During its first quarter of sales, the Celeron E1000 series accounted for around 3% of Intel's total desktop CPU shipments, and the ratio will not exceed 10% in 2008. The series is expected to completely replace single-core Celerons by the second quarter of 2009.

    Source: DigiTimes
     
  2. OnBoard

    OnBoard New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2006
    Messages:
    3,044 (1.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    379
    Location:
    Finland
    Celeron faster than my E4300 @ stock :( (on those tests/programs where cache amount has little to no effect). I do't see many people buying single cores after these :)
     
  3. zolkorn

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Messages:
    15 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Location:
    Bankkok,Thailand ( Siam )
    Some performance from Celeron E1600@default clock :toast: and more results can looked here >> CLICK
    [​IMG]

    ;)
     
  4. newtekie1

    newtekie1 Semi-Retired Folder

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2005
    Messages:
    20,128 (6.12/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,190
    Thank you!
     
    Crunching for Team TPU 50 Million points folded for TPU
  5. breakfromyou New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2005
    Messages:
    298 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3
    Location:
    virginia, usa
    I can't remember the last time somebody bought a single core processor from where I work...We usually give up and end up selling them to another store.

    What i'm saying is: I don't think the whole dual core Celeron thing is a good idea. Just fork out the extra $10 and get a Pentium Dual Core...512kb of L2 cache shared between 2 cores is pretty ridiculous.
     
  6. ShadowFold

    ShadowFold New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 23, 2007
    Messages:
    16,921 (6.69/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,644
    Location:
    Omaha, NE
    They have some at newegg I know cause I saw them when I ordered my E2200
     
  7. JrRacinFan

    JrRacinFan Served 5k and counting ...

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    19,414 (6.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,483
    Location:
    Youngstown, OH
  8. DOM

    DOM

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,552 (2.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    828
    Location:
    TX, USA
  9. Xaser04

    Xaser04

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    743 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    106
    The following is taken from the X-bit review posted above:

    That is a segment of their conclusion focusing on the gaming performance. What they forget to mention however is that they are basing that conclusion on the fact that at 1024x768 (where the cpu is the limitation) the celeron doesn't do as well as its direct competition. Well how about at gaming resolutions then (ie the resolutions that most of us will probably use or want to see a review of)? What does it do there? 1680x1050 for example?
     
  10. DOM

    DOM

    Joined:
    May 30, 2006
    Messages:
    7,552 (2.43/day)
    Thanks Received:
    828
    Location:
    TX, USA
    :confused: going to be less like it always is when you up the res. its not good with games cuz it has very lil L2
     
  11. JrRacinFan

    JrRacinFan Served 5k and counting ...

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    19,414 (6.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    4,483
    Location:
    Youngstown, OH
    Are you sure on that Dom?

    1024x768 is more CPU dependent than 1680x1050. Meaning, If you crank the resolution, your now testing the vid card in combination with cpu, not just more cpu. Unless your using like integrated video.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page