Intel May Ditch Celeron Brand for Atom

--->
Dual Core Atom to maybe Replace Celeron in 2011 says Digitimes

 

I am good with this. I see why Intel might do.

 

There's definitely a huge difference between the Atom in my netbook and the (overclocked) Wolfdale Celeron in my media center - the latter can play games while the former cannot, no matter what kind of video card you might throw at it.

I've built a few computers for people using E3200/3300 Celeron chips, and they really can't be beat in terms of price to performance. I'd hate to see them disappear.

 

Just to make clear my thought was the branding would go away, not the actual component per se.

Syberia your point about the actual elimination of a market niche is as you said bad. That I do not see. Even if Intel wanted to and did remove the niche. The void would draw them back in 3 months. But like I said I think this is a branding/marketing decision not removal of a component from the supply chain long term.

 

Well, if they simply re-labeled these kinds of chips Atoms, I wouldn't care in the slightest.

 

Yeah, a renaming ala every nVidia GPU wouldn't be so bad...but to eliminate the Celerons as they are now for Atoms...completely stupid. I dont care what Atom you have...they are some pretty ty processors all around.

 

Atoms cannot really be compared to Celerons one way or the other.

Why isn't Intel simply using Celerons for netbooks in the first place?

Why develop a cpu in a smallest form factor, limit the heck out of it and use it in netbooks?
Surely reducing the Celerons in manuif. process would essentially serve the same purpose and still the heat output would be negligible.

Celerons were abridged versions of Pentiums and continue to be that..
A bit less powerful (not too much) and still delivering pretty neat price/performance ratio.

Is it me or is Intel being stupid developing Atoms in the first place?
By today's standards, we are getting an outdated cpu on a small manuf. process which is barely able to stream some web content as it is, and people pay good money for this.

Milking ...

 

for me , this would be good news for ppl. It will allow them 2 clear choices in budget market.. the 3 now are very confusing..

 

The EEE 701 used a 900MHz Celeron. And from Wiki:

 

Celeron to Live

 

bad news... i really hate computers with celeron's.. it makes me puke when i see them

 

That's because you are ignorant of what they are.

 

But don't you think that their true place has already beene taken by Pentium DC? Seriously, what have Celerons always used to be? Pentiums with lesser cache and lower FSB. Wait, that's exactly how you get a Pentium Dual Core))) So, in reality, we are still having good ol' Celerons, just branded with a nicer name and, actually, selling really well exactly because the old name had been dropped. Dropping that name altogether would have been a mistake tho, shafting it into the lower price-niche is a lot smarter since no Atom can compete with 'em

 

well there's still pentium duals etc... so not such a great loss..

 

I thought with the release of i3/5/7 that pentium and celeron were both gone?

Or are they going to continue selling the old pentiums and celerons.


Atom and Cerleron are definitely two different things. Atom is cheap (along with celeron) but made to use low power. Celeron ... not so much.

 

They should do i1, i3, i5, i7.

i1 = ULV for netbooks
i3 = Celeron replacement, low end brand
i5 = Mainstream, Core T- and Core P- series replacements
i7 = High end, Core Q- and Core X- replacements

 

There are Pentiums and Celerons based off the Nehalem architecture like the P4500, U3400 and U5400.

 

its actually a good idea but intel would nver do that. The buisness practice is such that ppl with smaller budgets get cheaper crappier products so they get ripped off by intel thinking they got high end products etc so intel wouldn't try to simply their naming but will try to complicate it more.

 

Celeron SU2300 makes you puke??????

 

Personally i wouldnt call the i3 a celeron replacement. I would class it as more of a low end core 2 duo replacement for example the T6600 which is a core 2 Duo which lacks features like virtualization from the higher models.

I think the low end chips will become the new pentiums which are beginning to appear.

 

JA JA JA JA JA!!!!

 

Intel has certainly created confusion by retaining so many brand names.

I think the real problem is that older brands such as Celeron and Pentium have lots of recognition and are too valuable to discard. The name "Celeron" is worth something, probably more than most people would realize. If Intel stops using it, it isn't worth anything since Intel wouldn't want to sell the Celeron name to a competitor.

Still, Intel just has too many brand names, and it doesn't help that there is a disconnect between the hardware generations and the brand names. I'd argue that the Core 2 name should be retained for low end chips because it is a much more honest technical description. Calling a single core processor a Core 2 Solo amounted to truth in advertising. It's honest and straightforward. Intel really should kill off the Atom, Celeron and Pentium names in favor of Core 2 Solo and Core 2 Duo.

My guess is that Intel might do the exact opposite and retain all of the other brand names, while killing off the Core 2 nameplate. Maybe consumer confusion is profitable?

 

IMO Intel ruined their Celeron name to the general consumer quite a while back, with the P6 based desktop Celerons. The people that bought those machines will always remember the name Celeron, and hold it synonymous with SLOW. We, today, that know what a current Celeron is, know that Intel has gone a LONG ways towards brand redemption. Celeron cores to begin with are only defective dies of the current mid-line Intel product. Usually the die will roll off the line with maybe a defective cache bank, and Intel will deactivate that bank, quality test it, then label it a cheaper product... a la Celeron. We (and I) don't know exactly what Intel's current bin-process is, but rest assured it's probably very close to what I said above. Let me explain...

• The first Mobile Celeron was a Northwood based core that was deemed a great deal faster than even it's desktop counterpart. Largely because of the fact that it had a larger L2 cache.
• Then Intel moved the line to the Pentium-M based cores... Banias, Shelton, Dothan, and Yonah. These were arguably some of the best mobile celerons made, especially concering the Yonah core Mobile Celeron. Because Yonah brought a die shrink, it also brought better battery life and cooler running machines into the mainstream, and budget families.
• Then came the Core-based Mobile Celerons... Merom, Merom-2M, and Penryn-3M. With this series came even more radical improvements. Including faster bus speeds, ULV Cores, Die-Shrinks, AND with the Penryn-3M core came the first dual core Celeron... The Celeron T3000.

Sean, if Celeron's make you puke, then you clearly have no respect for technology. Celerons have done more than you think to put Intel in the place they are today.

 

Doesent Intel cripple their notebook Celeron branded CPUs by diabling all the power saving tech?

I mean AMD also has their cheap Athlons, but at least they dont suck that badly. xD

 

Most all of the newer 65nm and smaller process Celerons have both SpeedStep and Idle States.

 

The very reason i hate them is because
1. They're so slow.
2. The price is so low that every school which really rips u off on money still can't afford anything better for the students other than a budget celeron.
3. Celeron is a crap name.

their desktop ones are no better and i agree with the second statement.. athlons are much better than celerons... my school has them in desktops and they're 100 times better than the celeron laptops or desktops.

 

Celeron's aren't dirt. They are great chips if you know what you're doing, and knowing what you're buying.

 

Compared to what? I wouldn't expect a bottom end processor to have the same performance as a high end processor.

Actually, why would most educational users need anything more than a Celeron? Do elementary school students use Autocad? No. Actually, most post-graduate disciplines don't demand all that much processing power.

Only to those who are entirely ignorant of technology. If a dual core Celeron P4500 is based on the same architecture as the rest of the Arrandale family, does the "Celeron" brand name make it crap?

Are you comparing dual core Athlons with single core Celerons? Honestly, I really don't think that processing power is a major issue in a primary or secondary school, especially one that is taxpayer funded. Sure, the kiddies might get upset that they can't play first person shooter games at full frame rates, but there again, why should the taxpayers fund gaming computers?

 

Celeron going nowhere but up

 

shakes head ....

 

I meant that's what Intel should do, not what they are doing. Like with my system, the i7-620M would be labeled an i5.

 

totally agree ...