Featured Articles

Nvidia Shield 2 shows up in AnTuTu

Nvidia Shield 2 shows up in AnTuTu

Nvidia’s original Shield console launched last summer to mixed reviews. It went on sale in the US and so far Nvidia…

More...
AMD CSO John Byrne talks ARM

AMD CSO John Byrne talks ARM

We had a chance to talk about AMD’s upcoming products with John Byrne, Chief Sales Officer, AMD. We covered a number…

More...
AMD Chief Sales Officer thinks GPU leadership is critical

AMD Chief Sales Officer thinks GPU leadership is critical

We had a chance to talk to John Byrne who spent the last two years as Senior Vice President and Chief…

More...
OpenPlus One $299 5.5-inch Full HD phone

OpenPlus One $299 5.5-inch Full HD phone

OnePlus is one of the few small companies that might disrupt the Android phone market, dominated by giant outfits like Samsung.…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Friday, 10 June 2011 10:04

Three new 32nm Celerons in September

Written by Fuad Abazovic
intel_logo_new

$52 and below for Sandy Bridge
Sandy Bridge 32nm architecture doesn’t have to cost a fortune. In its cheaper Celeron iteration, it sells for really modest $37 a piece. This money will buy you a single core Intel Celeron processor G440 with one core and one tread, and Intel is nice enough to offer you a whole 1MB of cache.

The second in line will offer you much more for only $5 more. The name is Celeron G530 and this is a 2.4GHz clocked dual core with two threads with a whole 2 MB of cache. It will sell for $42 once it launches in September.

The top of this new upgrade is Celeron G540, a $52 dual core with two threads and 2.5GHz core clock. This 2MB cache LGA1155 also comes in September and will be the fastest Sandy Bridge based Celeron.

These three new Celerons will start to replace Celeron E3x00 series based on LGA775 socket and clocked between 2.5 and 2.7GHz, all dual cores.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+13 #1 crackerz 2011-06-10 12:55
..and the motherboard would cost an arm or a leg, yeah thats the way intel..go on with that high prices

P.S. I prefer to get an AMD platform that would perform WAY better and I don't care if the cpu costs 150 the motherboard would be much more cheaper than an intel one so its the same money for greater performace and we are talking about quad core cpu or better
 
 
-26 #2 Drac 2011-06-10 16:41
Quoting crackerz:
i am amd fagboy !!!


So why then you leaving stupid "comments" here if you not interested? OH,i know - just another amd fagboy..
To your small knowledge,you can find Intel mobos for same price as amd,the difference is - Intel mobos always have more features.Thats first.
Second - amd platform perform way better? I LOL'ed at this BS xD
Since when amd platform perform better? You need to check all test just to find out that 6core amd easily loosing to 4core Intel.Yay,thats the "perform way better" i guess.You amd fagboys really amking me laugh :D
 
 
+22 #3 iicsus 2011-06-10 17:46
Quoting Drac:
you can find Intel mobos for same price as amd,the difference is - Intel mobos always have more features


No, they don't.
 
 
+13 #4 Cartman 2011-06-10 17:50
Hahahahaha why would you buy a single core CPU today, dear God Intel is selling single core CPUs in 2011 , but its funny cuz there are idiots who would buy that ...

BTW why is not a surprise to see that Fuad wrote this article LOL
 
 
+10 #5 crackerz 2011-06-10 23:00
Quoting Drac:
..To your small knowledge..


I'm a computer technician you idiot with experiance as your age(>10yr), Oh btw did I mention that I have a BSc at computing? ..sorry for forgeting to write it. Drac..next time you write something try to think it a little bit.

P.S. I ALWAYS go best price/performance and AMD rule at that, if the things turn around I will go to intel without thinking. Celeron or ANY cpu with one core is a step backward, I prefer 300Mhz down but Dual core at least rather than one core higher clocked.

iicsus I totally agree with you and I add, you can find many features in an amd motherboard as many as in an intel one and you can find a mobo with very few features in both platforms ;-}
 
 
+14 #6 TechHog 2011-06-11 00:02
So, not only are they selling a single-core CPU, but they're selling a dual core for $5 more. DOES NOT COMPUTE
 
 
+4 #7 crackerz 2011-06-11 17:10
Quoting TechHog:
So, not only are they selling a single-core CPU, but they're selling a dual core for $5 more. DOES NOT COMPUTE


If you are a company with tons of money.. you don't care for 'details' like this ahhaahh
 
 
+5 #8 TechHog 2011-06-11 19:48
Quoting crackerz:
Quoting TechHog:
So, not only are they selling a single-core CPU, but they're selling a dual core for $5 more. DOES NOT COMPUTE


If you are a company with tons of money.. you don't care for 'details' like this ahhaahh

But it's clocked at 1.6GHz! Who in their right mind would buy a 1.6GHz single-core when a 2.4GHz dual-core is only $5 more? Someone at Intel needs to be fired.
 
 
+2 #9 crackerz 2011-06-11 21:37
Quoting TechHog:
Quoting crackerz:
Quoting TechHog:
So, not only are they selling a single-core CPU, but they're selling a dual core for $5 more. DOES NOT COMPUTE


If you are a company with tons of money.. you don't care for 'details' like this ahhaahh

But it's clocked at 1.6GHz! Who in their right mind would buy a 1.6GHz single-core when a 2.4GHz dual-core is only $5 more? Someone at Intel needs to be fired.


It depends on what you are looking, if the single core and 1.6GHz consumes 30w and the dual core consumes 60w then we can choose on power bases(the TDP is not what a cpu consumes in an normal situation)

P.S. Thats the only reason that I can find, feel free to add if something else is in your mind.
 
 
0 #10 D31337Antics 2011-06-13 20:56
I have to agree with TechHog about price but crackerz does bring up a good point about TDP. In all seriousness regardless of clock speeds how can a processor with twice as many cores and cache cost only 5$ more? I am probably missing something but it feels like either the dual-core should cost a little more or the single-core should cost a little less.

What do you guys think?
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments