Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Celeron Dual-Core Linux Performance

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Intel Celeron Dual-Core Linux Performance

    Phoronix: Intel Celeron Dual-Core Linux Performance

    While nearly all of Intel's attention is focused on their newer LGA-1366 platform with the high-end Core i7 processors and then the forthcoming Core i5 series, there are still plenty of viable processors left for the LGA-775 motherboards. There are of course a number of different Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Quad, and Core 2 Extreme CPUs on the market, but beyond that Intel's Celeron family does still exist. Most computer enthusiasts simply write off the Celeron products as being too slow, but among the newer Celeron parts there are even some dual-core processors. For a forthcoming article we had picked up an Intel Celeron E1400 for looking at the Linux video decoding performance on a slow system (similar to our HD Video Playback With A $20 CPU & $30 GPU On Linux article), but as we have never published performance results for a dual-core Celeron on Linux, we have decided to get those numbers out there today for those that are interested.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=14065

  • #2
    for just a few bucks more they are selling AM2 athlon x2's. It doesnt make much sense to buy a dual core celeron when you have such a proven cpu at such a low price.

    http://canadacomputers.com/index.php...17&cid=CPU.907

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by L33F3R View Post
      for just a few bucks more they are selling AM2 athlon x2's. It doesnt make much sense to buy a dual core celeron when you have such a proven cpu at such a low price.

      http://canadacomputers.com/index.php...17&cid=CPU.907
      Ya it would be also interesting to see how it would stack up against the new AMD Regor cores.

      Comment


      • #4
        Hmm...

        I comparison between a similar priced Athlon X2, and maybe higher end parts would have been far more interesting.
        This only illustrates that the dual-core celeron is faster than a single-core sempron.

        Comment


        • #5
          Comparason

          Nice test, but I would honestly be more interested in how it compared to a "real" Core 2 Duo at the same clock frequence.

          To my understanding the Celeron E1400, the Pentium Dual Core E2180, and the Core 2 Duo E4400 are the same processor (Allendale Dual-Core @ 2.0 GHz), but with different amounts of L2 cache (512 kB, 1 MB and 2 MB).

          As they sell at vastly diferent prices (~$55, ~$85 and ~$145) it would be interesting to see whether that extra cache really is worth it.

          Comment


          • #6
            Please compare the new 45nm DC AMD semprons with the intel ones, not these old AMD CPUs. And maybe a also with older X2 CPUs. And please give a price/performance overview. Then it is a great review, thanks.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by bugmenot View Post
              Please compare the new 45nm DC AMD semprons with the intel ones, not these old AMD CPUs. And maybe a also with older X2 CPUs.
              Easier said then done... Get Intel and AMD to send out more processors to Linux review sites.
              Michael Larabel
              http://www.michaellarabel.com/

              Comment


              • #8
                One suggestion that would be relatively inexpensive to implement would be to give power consumption numbers in your tests. The appropriate meter only costs $20.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Yeah - a multi-core2 review would be nice. It looks like the lack-of-cache doesn't hurt in Linux too much, but on most review sites the E1400 suffers *badly* in games because of the limited L2.

                  The 45nm Celeron desktop series (E3xxx) will have 1MB L2 like the Pentium-DC E2xxx's did and should be a much better deal. And it might overclock better to boot...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Now won't there be the people who built some dual Celeron 300's who claim these oldies still rock?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      For their time a dual C300A was awesome, but now even an Atom 330 would beat them handidly.

                      That's the thing about old PC hardware vs 80's non-IBM comps. Eventually the cheapest thing one can get is usually better in most/every way (albeit with some exceptions)

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X