Monday, November 4th 2013

Intel Debuts Six New Celeron Mobile Processors

Intel has yesterday updated its processor offer, adding no less than six new models, all Celerons and all targeting mobile devices. This fresh batch is of ultra-low voltage variety and it includes two chips based on the Haswell architecture, the Celeron 2981U and 2957U, and four on the Silvermont architecture (and part of the Bay Trail-M line-up), the Celeron N2920, N2820, N2815 and N2806.

Frequency-wise, the processors go from 1.40 GHz to 2.13 GHz, but they don't really vary in terms of pricing as five of them cost $132, while only the Celeron 2981U goes for $137. More details in the table below.
Add your own comment

15 Comments on Intel Debuts Six New Celeron Mobile Processors

#1
shiny_red_cobra
Omg why. Can they retire the useless celeron processor already? They have the Core i3 at the same price point, which is a better processor.
Posted on Reply
#2
natr0n
shiny_red_cobra said:
Omg why. Can they retire the useless celeron processor already? They have the Core i3 at the same price point, which is a better processor.
I think celeron is used for reject cpus only.

Also, this is the 1st time i have seen a quad core celeron.
Posted on Reply
#3
Red_Machine
Wow, that's something I never thought I'd see. A quad-core Celery.
Posted on Reply
#4
a_ump
shiny_red_cobra said:
Omg why. Can they retire the useless celeron processor already? They have the Core i3 at the same price point, which is a better processor.
They aren't useless, esp not with the Ivy Bridge ones and Haswell celerons to come. I ran an Ivy Bridge G1610 2.6ghz dual core for about 7 months, played Crysis, SC2, tf2; any game i played ran good with it. I used it until i got my i5-3570k, it was a great temporary CPU.

Today's celerons aren't the same "brand" and class of celerons that there used to be between Celeron and P4/C2 products.
Posted on Reply
#5
night.fox
hmmmm if they start making a quad core celeron, they might start building an 6 core (physical) mainstream, 8 core (physical core) enthusiast and 10-12 core (physical) high end...

Plus HT, a whooping 24 cores....
Posted on Reply
#6
lemonadesoda
Must be a typo in the table. It makes no sense, esp. the N2920
Posted on Reply
#7
Drone
while only the Celeron 2981U goes for $137
and what's so special about it?
Posted on Reply
#8
sanadanosa
N series processors are supposed to be Atoms, am I wrong?
Posted on Reply
#9
zsolt_93
Something along the line of Atoms, yes. A bit higher end but still designed for low demanding tasks, Atoms are now destined for Smartphone/Tablet SoC use i think, so this is what we get instead of them. I remember seeing rumors about some models, the most powerful designated as Pentium, but nothing official so far.
Posted on Reply
#10
Fiery
FinalWire / AIDA64 Developer
sanadanosa said:
N series processors are supposed to be Atoms, am I wrong?
Not anymore. The new Bay Trail codenamed desktop and mobile "Atoms" are called Celeron and Pentium. Intel will however keep calling it Atom for the tablet range (e.g. Atom Z3770), and for the embedded and micro-server range as well.
Posted on Reply
#11
natr0n
Red_Machine said:
Wow, that's something I never thought I'd see. A quad-core Celery.
:laugh:
Posted on Reply
#14
Fiery
FinalWire / AIDA64 Developer
nickbaldwin86 said:
These are just name changed Atom CPUs... JUNK!
Not really junk. The new Atoms, based on Bay Trail (Silvermont) can easily outperform the great CPUs of 7 years ago, like a Core 2 Extreme X6800:

AIDA64 v3.20, Core 2 Extreme X6800 "Conroe" vs. Atom Z3770 "Bay Trail-T". Both CPUs are at stock clock settings, both running 32-bit Windows (since the Z3770 currently doesn't support running 64-bit Windows).

code:

C2X X6800 Atom Z3770
Conroe Bay Trail-T
---------------------------------------
Mem.Read: 7838 11796
Mem.Write: 4875 8383
Mem.Copy: 5537 9956
Mem.Latency: 79.6 119.2
CPU Queen: 12562 16681
CPU PhotoWorxx: 3464 4407
CPU ZLib: 71.6 88.6
CPU AES: 266 1741
CPU Hash: 923 810
FPU VP8: 1646 1945
FPU Julia: 3509 3694
FPU Mandel: 1770 1297
FPU SinJulia: 1023 884



Note that Core 2 Extreme X6800 has a 75W TDP, while the Atom Z3770 uses a max. TDP of 5W while pushing Turbo Boost to its maximum rate. Average TDP for Z3770 is around 3 to 4W.
Posted on Reply
#15
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Fiery said:
Not really junk. The new Atoms, based on Bay Trail (Silvermont) can easily outperform the great CPUs of 7 years ago, like a Core 2 Extreme X6800:

AIDA64 v3.20, Core 2 Extreme X6800 "Conroe" vs. Atom Z3770 "Bay Trail-T". Both CPUs are at stock clock settings, both running 32-bit Windows (since the Z3770 currently doesn't support running 64-bit Windows).

code:

C2X X6800 Atom Z3770
Conroe Bay Trail-T
---------------------------------------
Mem.Read: 7838 11796
Mem.Write: 4875 8383
Mem.Copy: 5537 9956
Mem.Latency: 79.6 119.2
CPU Queen: 12562 16681
CPU PhotoWorxx: 3464 4407
CPU ZLib: 71.6 88.6
CPU AES: 266 1741
CPU Hash: 923 810
FPU VP8: 1646 1945
FPU Julia: 3509 3694
FPU Mandel: 1770 1297
FPU SinJulia: 1023 884



Note that Core 2 Extreme X6800 has a 75W TDP, while the Atom Z3770 uses a max. TDP of 5W while pushing Turbo Boost to its maximum rate. Average TDP for Z3770 is around 3 to 4W.
Thhhiiiiiiiiiiiiiis.

Celerons are quite nice. I'm using a Celeron right now, and I honestly would not make use of more power. The stock cooler SUCKS though, it loads at +50C and whines like a baby whirlwind. It's not running fast, and it doesn't rattle, it just emitts this high pitcted noise that cuts through everything. And it's not the case. It's that fan. I HATE IT.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment