Heh sounds good, should be a nice upgrade for my brothers little 478 P4 3.0 HT....

Doesn't have a ton of money, but I think that might be a good go for a boost.
But may go for the e2140 or even a e4**** anyways.

this chip is good for basic stuff atleast all the celerons i owend but duel core cellys i want to know how they perform in games lol

niko084Heh sounds good, should be a nice upgrade for my brothers little 478 P4 3.0 HT....

Doesn't have a ton of money, but I think that might be a good go for a boost.
But may go for the e2140 or even a e4**** anyways.

Yeah, I'd say spend the extra $9 and get much more L2 cache at least.

Jimmy 2004Yeah, I'd say spend the extra $9 and get much more L2 cache at least.

Thats what I was pushing on him, but being he doesn't play many games anymore he isn't too up on spending money... I was thinking about buying him a e4400 just so I knew he had decent power.

I don't think this chip is worth the price. With the E2140 only being $9 more, and double the cache, this chips isn't really competitive. I could see if people absolutely wanted to spend as little money as possible on a chip, and still get a decent chip, because they plan to upgrade quickly to a better processor, but other than that, I don't see many people saving that $9.

newtekie1I don't think this chip is worth the price. With the E2140 only being $9 more, and double the cache, this chips isn't really competitive. I could see if people absolutely wanted to spend as little money as possible on a chip, and still get a decent chip, because they plan to upgrade quickly to a better processor, but other than that, I don't see many people saving that $9.

Your probably right but at the OEM chip level for companies like HP, Acer, Compaq, E-Machine this is going to be huge.

niko084Your probably right but at the OEM chip level for companies like HP, Acer, Compaq, E-Machine this is going to be huge.

Definitely.

Best pricing would be if it is around $45 shipped. Since this thing has less cache may overclock well too. 6GHZ?

suraswamiBest pricing would be if it is around $45 shipped. Since this thing has less cache may overclock well too. 6GHZ?

Wont see it, the single core is about that.

niko084Wont see it, the single core is about that.

Thats true. You know Single cores should be reduced to 20's or even better Buy one dual Core and get a Single core cpu free:D

You can use the single core for Bios updates or paper weight:laugh:

I bought my AM2 Single Core A64 3200 brand new for $20 at Frys:D. I use this as spare CPU.

suraswamiThats true. You know Single cores should be reduced to 20's or even better Buy one dual Core and get a Single core cpu free:D

You can use the single core for Bios updates or paper weight:laugh:

I bought my AM2 Single Core A64 3200 brand new for $20 at Frys:D. I use this as spare CPU.

Well I can agree with you.... Single cores are dated... Almost everything will use 2 cores now, and its taking over. By the next major release of chips we shouldn't see single cores anymore.

ehhh too expensive

Come on! It has been available for sale in Latvia for about a month, and i tested it week ago.
Your news is older than my grandma.

KasparzCome on! It has been available for sale in Latvia for about a month, and i tested it week ago.
Your news is older than my grandma.

+1

old news!

Jimmy 2004The processor is based on Intel’s Core architecture and is manufactured using a 65nm process

really? Core, not Core 2?

niko084Well I can agree with you.... Single cores are dated... Almost everything will use 2 cores now, and its taking over. By the next major release of chips we shouldn't see single cores anymore.

Single cores have a very practical purpose still - for the business looking to replace the office systems but want to spend an absolute minimum, in which case a single core chip could cost what? £20 each?

I agree, too pricey. Things look way better on the AMD side at that price.

evil billreally? Core, not Core 2?

The Core 2s are based on the Core architecture. That is just the generic Intel marketting.

jothyI agree, too pricey. Things look way better on the AMD side at that price.

Agreed, if you aren't overclocking(most low end users don't) AMD has this price range down. A 4200+ can be had for this price.

yup and a Core 2 2 line can be had for what that celeron is, such a waste of money when the core 2 2 line and higher are going to be way faster than the celerons anyway.

Ok guys.

A little addon to this topic since i own a Dual Core Celeron E1200.

Let me tell you something about CPU-Z and this CPU.

Intel Celeron E1200 @ 1.6ghz
Revision M0
Codename: Conroe
L2 Cache 512kb

This CPU is a bottleneck for any good Videocard at stock speed.

I benched my HD 2900 Pro 256bit 750/1000 at 1.6ghz


3DMark03 = 29.650
3DMark05 = 8.994
3DMark06 = 6.549

Now since we know its a Conroe Core I did a little bid overclocking. I set the Voltage to about 1.45V with a vdroop to 1.29V use a 400mhz FSB and there we go.

3.2ghz 100% overclock.

Abit QuadGT P965 Chipset
2x1gb Geil Esoteria
HD 2900 Pro
Cooling Coolermaster Aquagate S1

So it was pretty easy, the CPU is not hot at all and i did another 3DMark06 and the score went up like 10.287.

So if you overclock the holy crap out of that CPU you can game just fine with it. Actually i think at 3.2ghz this Celeron kills about any AMD X2 Dual Core.

Highst i got so far was 3.3ghz but i m afraid with my board there is not much more to gain.

www.tomshardware.com/2007/10/22/budget_overclocker/page14.html

Read the entire review of those CPUs.

Yes but crazyhorse, what resolution were those 3dmark runs ran at?

I'm going to guess default resolutions.

Which is what? 1024x768?

How could he state then at that low of a resolution it was holding back the graphics card? I mean most graphics based cpu benches were done at that res or lower.

Now I could see if he ran 1440x900 or higher on all tests and then gave us a difference but I beleive those results are based more towards the cpu in itself. Just my .02.

Now that the initial release is over, the price has settled down to $59.99, which is $15 less than the E2140. That isn't nearly as bad, I might pick one of these little guys up.

3Dmark06 defualts to 1280x1024, the others are 1024x768. At those resolutions the tests are definitely CPU dependant, which is what we want when we are testing the performance of the processor. In all likely hood, this processor will do just fine with a nice overclock in real world situations.