Intel readies budget dual-core Celerons

By on October 18, 2007, 2:11 PM
Intel is reportedly preparing to push dual-core capability into the value market with the introduction of new dual-core Celerons during the first quarter of 2008, as the chip giant begins phasing out single-core products.

The first dual-core Celeron processor, the E1200, will have a core frequency of 1.60GHz, 800MHz FSB and 512KB of unified L2 cache at a price of $53 in thousand-unit quantities. Later during the year Intel plans to add more chips into the Intel Celeron E1000 dual-core lineup, which are set to be made using 65nm process technology and are projected to fit into 65W thermal design power envelope.

Intel will also launch two E4000 series processors based on its 45nm process in the first few months of 2008. The E4700 will have a clockspeed of 2.6GHz, 800MHz FSB and 2MB L2 cache. Details of the second E4000-series chip are not yet available, but according to DigiTimes’ sources, it will support a 1066MHz FSB and have 3MB L2 cache.

Whether or not this announcement will put enough pressure on AMD to transition the Sempron line to dual-core remains to be seen, as the company is already struggling to compete Intel in the high-end, and server markets.




User Comments: 2

Got something to say? Post a comment
wild9 said:
How is AMD struggling in the server market? There are 4-core processors available that can replace dual-core solutions in less than 10 minutes, using the same socket technology and TDP envelope, ie the same cooler. I call that minimal downtime and the pricing very competitive.As regards high-end computing, the University of Texas is currently installing a super-computer based on 15,000 quad-core AMD processors. These products were chosen for the their low latencies and AMD's good customer service reputation..the same reason Lucas Arts preferred to work with the green rather than the blue, corner.In both sectors the difference in micro-architecture performance in favour of Intel, is offset by AMD's superior low latency when scaling multiple cores and as mentioned, good client relationship.These dual-core Celeron's are going to have a hard time competing with AMD, thanks in part to the competition between AMD and Intel at the performance end pushing down prices to the point where budget no longer buys substandard performance. For example, why have a Celeron when you can have a 'full' processor such as the A64x2, or Core2Duo?The 65 TDP of these Celeron's doesn't look that good on paper either, although the 45nm products should improve on this especially if they can incorporate additional power-saving hardware.Price is obviously a crucial key factor here and I don't think Intel is willing to throw full-blown processors into the bargain bin in order to compete at this level..unlike AMD. So instead of waiting for these Celeron's to emerge I would choose AMD's current budget offerings, complete with their better caches, Hyper-Transport Technology and an onboard memory controller. Intel can't afford to offer C2D tehnology at this price point.Even with 'reject' stock sporting reduced L2 cache and lower HTT speed I reckon the AMD would offer a better all-round solution.[Edited by wild9 on 2007-10-19 15:38:33]
mirob said:
Barcelona has problems with latency do to the three levels of cache. Bandwidth is where AMD has the biggest advantage. Bandwidth only helps in a few types of programs but with added core it be comes more important.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.