Read more.Quote:
Intel has introduced dual core technology to its low-end processor family, the Celeron, in the form of the Celeron E1200, part of the E1000 series.
Printable View
Read more.Quote:
Intel has introduced dual core technology to its low-end processor family, the Celeron, in the form of the Celeron E1200, part of the E1000 series.
I wonder how they perform? these will be nice if you can get a decent overclock.
They're already on Scan at £35 + postage. Not a particularly attractive offer while the Pentium Dual-Cores are around for not a lot more. 2x256kb - I know cache isn't as important as many make out, but that's half and a quarter of the already (relatively) stingy Pentium DCs. It's certainly no Celeron 300A. They'll make it in the mass OEM market, and we'll consider them at work (school), but I doubt many here will consider it a viable option for their own PC or one they build for others.
A chip for the PCWorld marketing team if ever I saw one.
Yeah I noticed the price on Scan as well. Are they any good for a HTPC system or should I go for core 2?
@ Blackmage: Apparently you can o/c a e1200 to about 3.5Ghz but I've not read any proof of that anywhere, just heresay in other forums. Still, you got to admit a 3.5Ghz dual core processor for circa £30 isn't bad....even if it has only got a small cache and low fsb speed.
well the pentium dual cores are well documented for hitting 3.0GHz. Not sure about the celerons.. I don't like the name.. celeron.. doesn't sit right :p
my old (now sold) pentium d 920 - stock 2.8ghz chip, ran stock 2.8ghz at 1v vcore (lowest available in bios), and a stable 4.2ghz on water.....and it was one of the first pentium d's released - the later stepping went even higher..... if you can get a pentium d for roughly the price of the celeron, get the PD :D
I Know what you mean intel need to drop that name.Quote:
Originally Posted by staffsMike
Been looking at the reviews they are impressive when overclocked!
X-bit labs - Celeron E1200: Dual-Core Processor Almost for Free (page 8)
I'd rather work out Pi using an abacus than a Pentium D to be honest. Hot, sucked more power than E.ON sucks money and it's old tech too. If MHz meant everything it would be a viable option, but I'd bet encoding an MPEG2 video on a Pentium D would take about a third longer than on something like a E2160, and if you overclocked the difference would just grow.Quote:
Originally Posted by vrykyl
Personally I thought that the Pentium name was to be the new Celeron with the Pentium Dual-Cores. Obviously not - presumably AMD were undercutting the Dual-Cores at the low end?