Celeron processors?

[ev1lchris]

Are Celeron processors really bad?

[expatbrit]

If you are talking about Celeron CPU's it depends on what you mean by "really bad" !

Did you have any particular "processor" in mind ? There are many !

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/celeron/celeron-processor.html

[doccalamity]

Depends what you do with it. For 99 percent of the people out there they are just fine.

[doccalamity]

That being said, for a little bit more you will get great value.

[NeverSure]

There's nothing wrong with the quality and durability of the Celeron. It's just lower powered with fewer instruction sets. Some people think it's ideal for a laptop as it uses less power from the battery. If you're not doing heavy work but just surfing the web, doing word processing etc., a Celeron would do fine. If you're into gaming, of course it isn't the answer.

Cheers.

[Ragzilb]

If you plan on Gaming Fallout 4 its a no go, but for any office work if fine and cheap

[Pib]

Celeron CPUs just have less horsepower, fewer instructions sets. usually lower bus/clock speeds, lower on chip cache, cost less, etc. But that don't mean they dont' work just fine for light-duty computering.

Think of them as 4 cylinder engines in comparison to more powerful 6 and 8 cylinder engines. 4 cylinder engines work perfect fine, it's just they don't have the horsepower or higher cylinder engines along with not having some off the additional options that may come with bigger engines.

[lostinisaan]

I have a Celeron D to sell. Very cheap. The motherboard comes wth it.

[naboo]

Just bought a cheap laptop (6990B) with an Intel Celeron N2840 2.16 GHz processor (its only dual core) and 2 GB RAM.

Loaded up a 32-bit Linux OS and for browsing the net, doing a bit of office work and even streaming some SD TV, its fine.

Not sure I'd want to try it with any version of Windows post XP though.

[NeverSure]

Just bought a cheap laptop (6990B) with an Intel Celeron N2840 2.16 GHz processor (its only dual core) and 2 GB RAM.

Loaded up a 32-bit Linux OS and for browsing the net, doing a bit of office work and even streaming some SD TV, its fine.

Not sure I'd want to try it with any version of Windows post XP though.

Your first bottleneck would be a lack of RAM. Put at least 6 gigs in it and it would run the newer versions of Windows just fine.

Cheers.

[SpaceKadet]

Yes, they are

If you just want to browse the web and answer e-mails, save yourself a lot of money and buy an Android tabled or one of those iThing gadgets. They are cheaper and processors are more powerful than top of the range Celerons.

Why anybody would want to put a Celeron in a workstation or a laptop is totally beyond me.

Ten years ago, maybe, now, definitely not.

[Pib]

Yes, they are

If you just want to browse the web and answer e-mails, save yourself a lot of money and buy an Android tabled or one of those iThing gadgets. They are cheaper and processors are more powerful than top of the range Celerons.

Why anybody would want to put a Celeron in a workstation or a laptop is totally beyond me.

Ten years ago, maybe, now, definitely not.

The SoC/CPUs in tablets are indeed cheaper than a top range Celeron found in a laptop/desktop, but I guarantee you the SOCs are "not" as powerful. Price and horsepower closely collated in today's CPU/SoC market.

SoCs are basically a CPU plus more of the motherboard support circuitry brought onboard to the SoC. But to do that higher integration upon the SoC without costing an arm and a leg they give up horsepower and other things. As chips can be made smaller and smaller, more integrated and cheaper, SoCs will slowly replace CPUs in laptops/notebooks. But until then SoCs are still pretty much a smartphone/tablet thing where much less horsepower is needed due to much less demanding software and hardware requirements.

[SpaceKadet]

Granted @Pib, but here I'm referring to the total user package. Browsing, email, streaming. The speed, user friendliness and application availability of the environments of Anrdoid or whatever iThing uses beats the Celeron/Win/Linux combination hands down....

I suppose by SoC you mean the Intel support chips that do the real work, like the X99 I'm writing this on?

And if you start to measure the performance RISC ARM processors in real applications as compared to x86, you would be surprised... where is that MC68000 when you need one?

[ev1lchris]

I need something that will let me show movies to my students. Also I want to do some Python programming and web design. Maybe some music recording.

[SpaceKadet]

Do yourself a favor ev1l... Intel i5 at least... Cellery belongs in a soup, not on the motherboard...

[Pib]

I would recommend at least an i3....i5 would be better if keeping the laptop long term....an i7 would be overkill for your needs. But for you needs you could get away with a Celeron or a Pentium, it just it will be slow at the more demanding taskings. For showing videos to kids a Celeron will work just fine as showing a typical video is not really demanding as even lower horsepower SoC in the cheapest smartphones/tablets will do that just fine.

When the Celeron came out many years ago it was a weak chip in comparison to a Pentium chip and still is "in comparison" to current day Pentium and up chips. Intel intentionally has a staircased series of CPU families where the horsepower climbs...Celeron, then Pentium, then i3, then i5, then i7...and the price is staggered along in sync. Current day Celerons are more powerful than earlier Celerons. And for current day mobile Celeron and Pentium chips there is little difference in horsepower when it comes to their benchmarks results that make a real world difference in how fast the computer/software will operated. And don't try to compare horsepower-wise a mobile CPU with a desktop CPU as the desktop CPU is different/more powerful....it's not an apples to apples comparison. Ex: a desktop i3 CPU will have significant more horsepower than it's closest equivalent of a mobile i3.

But with the Celeron being weaker don't mean it don't work just fine for everyday computering/applications. Since Celeron initial release numerous years ago newer Celeron releases have gained more power just as newer releases of Pentium, i3, i5, i7 have gained horsepower. Now days for the laptop/mobile versions of these chips they are not getting much more powerful (because they already have plenty of horsepower), but instead they are concentrating on making them use less power/longer battery life which has throttled back the increase in horsepower in order to gain power efficiency. The mobile chips give up horsepower in order to gain lower power use capability.

When you go into stores many times they will have some video playing on the computer and those videos will be playing smoothly regardless of CPU they are running on as playing a video really don't require a lot of horsepower. Heck, video play just fine on your little couple thousand baht smartphone/tablet running some low horsepower SoC.

It sounds like you are really looking for a low cost laptop...those laptops with a Celeron will be the lowest cost since the Celeron CPU costs less in comparison to Pentium and the i3/5/7. But occasionally you can catch a good sale on an i3. But for a low end, low cost laptop in the 8 to 12K baht ballpark you are generally talking a Celeron or Pentium mobile CPU or it's AMD CPU equivalents...and I've long lost track of the various AMD CPUs which staircase in price and horsepower just like the Intel CPUs. Most of the AMDs mobile chips you see now days will be in the low end laptops...these lower end AMD CPUs are just fine also. But personally, I would go with Intel.