Intel Celeron G6900 Benchmarks - Performance Of Intel's $40~60 Alder Lake Processor

[Anux]

That test ist great, good selection of low to medium CPUs. Somehow the 2400G is missing in some tests and therefore also in the geomean.

I've said it before I'll say it now, desktop 2-core (even with 4 threads, e.g. ADL Pentiums) CPUs must not exist, period. Such CPUs might be OK for NAS or something like that.

Modern web browsers plus background tasks can easily saturate all of the cores and user experience becomes horrible: everything starts lagging and behave erratically.

That sounds like a windows problem. For the causal linux user that manly consumes social media and other web stuff that CPU is more than enough. My "high-end" system has a Ryzen 2400G in it and looking at this benchmark the g6900 is pretty close in most consumer workloads. Heck, I'm doing RAW editing on that CPU and always feel that it has more than enough power. I seldomly edit images on an even slower system and yes there is a short wait here and there but nothing to worry about.

Also it sounds like you think a quad core with the same benchmark results as another dual core is somehow faster or doesn't stall? How would you exlain that phenomenon technically?

[andre30correia]

no ideia why two performance cores not 4 four low ones

[ptrwis]

The performance of this processor is enough for browsing the Internet, the problem is that the price of motherboards for them is high compared to the price of the processor itself.

[Slartifartblast]

Or an AMD chip and get better graphics as well.

Wait for 5nm and RDNA2 in that case, rumour has it that it's around GTX1650 performance but we'll see later on in the year.

https://wccftech.com/amd-rembrandt-ryzen-6000-apus-with-rdna-2-gpus-could-offer-geforce-gtx-1650-performance-out-of-the-box/

[birdie]

That test ist great, good selection of low to medium CPUs. Somehow the 2400G is missing in some tests and therefore also in the geomean.


That sounds like a windows problem. For the causal linux user that manly consumes social media and other web stuff that CPU is more than enough. My "high-end" system has a Ryzen 2400G in it and looking at this benchmark the g6900 is pretty close in most consumer workloads. Heck, I'm doing RAW editing on that CPU and always feel that it has more than enough power. I seldomly edit images on an even slower system and yes there is a short wait here and there but nothing to worry about.

Also it sounds like you think a quad core with the same benchmark results as another dual core is somehow faster or doesn't stall? How would you exlain that phenomenon technically?

This has been my experience on Linux, e.g. when I launch Firefox with 5 pinned websites (slack, telegram web, twitter, my company website and some others) the system starts lagging. I run Fedora 35 with an Intel iGPU which has 16GB of RAM of which at least 10GB are free at any point of time. And then there's an SSD disk. SWAP is completely disabled. I'm running XFCE without compositing. There are no background tasks to speak of. Under Windows 10 on the same laptop the system is a whole lot more reponsive. It's a dual core Intel Core i5 CPU, 6200U.

[ms178]

Buying on the used market provides more value than this dual core option in the same price range. You can get a formidable 8-Core Haswell-EP Xeon for the same price and a better experience than with this Celeron. Even on a cheap Chinese X99 motherboard.

[otoomet]

I have i7-3770 as one of my main computers, the high-end ivy bridge from 2012. There are only 3 tests in common but what I see that it is basically a tie, ALD is faster on single core but loses on multi-core tasks (3770 is 4c/8t). I feel the speed is ok for me, not great but acceptable.

[blackshard]

Well, for 50$ this processor has some sense, but indeed this is not a balanced choice: in some benchmarks it performs close to top (single core in-cache number crunching), in most benchmarks is close to bottom and in some benchmarks it IS the bottom.
No way, for a general purpose desktop I like something which always stays at the middle or at the bottom or at the top, not anything like this.

An interesting benchmark although would be against older generation Pentium/Celeron, to see how much P cores and graphics improved (or regressed...)

[cjcox]

no ideia why two performance cores not 4 four low ones

There's still a lot of stuff that feels faster using a single thread mode. This isn't a gaming CPU, nor is it a server CPU. So IMHO, the threads aren't the target here. Responsive low end desktop performance might be the target.

Even so, this lowly processor can replace your mid-range i5 Sandy Bridge (if someone is still using one). And it's surprisingly close in many situations to even Haswell in performance (i7-4770K). What would have made this "killer" would have been lower power usage (maybe).

It's a Celeron. It's not a "mistake" Celeron (because Intel does that every once and in a while). Nothing surprising. But does show you what "new" can do against mid-tier (very) old.

[pmorph]

I guess this can be a useful, if you want an LGA-1700 CPU, but can't afford a good one quite yet.