Celeron still garbage?

nyxanna · Mar 2, 2014

Back in the day Celeron computers had to be avoided like the plague. They were just completely useless and slow.

However that was perhaps 10 years ago and I haven't kept up with technology. I was going to buy a laptop for someone who only browses the internet but I still wouldn't want to buy Celeron even if it's just for browsing.

Has Celeron improved over time? Is it still as bad or is it quite good now?

Trave · Mar 2, 2014

well for me Celeron still garbage is a yes,but if your just using it for browsing and basic stuff i think your good to go,but i prefer to you to get a better laptop.

khicharkumar · Mar 2, 2014

Celerons form then till now are still crippled Pentiums. And currently Pentiums are crippled i3 (hyper-treading disables and cache cut off).

Basically Celeron genre is a just meant for general computing not for intense tasks like gaming and productivity.

satyamdubey · Mar 2, 2014

Post sandy bridge, the pentiums and celerons improved to the extent that they made capable mid-budget gaming chips. In that sense, they are definitely not garbage. The performance divide between them and the core i cpus may be remarkable but they can do more than just powering up a low-end browsing only system.

-Satyam

khicharkumar · Mar 2, 2014

satyamdubey :

I wont agree to that. If you want to game you must have at least a i3 that too Haswell or Ivvy Bridge. And for intense task no one earth would advice anything less than a true quad-core ie. i5.

Celeron if only a gaming option at not more than 1366*768 ( and in that too current gen will games wont go beyond medium details or even some wont launch like COD Ghosts unless you use a cracked launcher) :no:

khicharkumar · Mar 2, 2014

Back in those days at least you can game on them without problems ( I have used a 378pin celeron 478pin celeron SL6VR and 775 pin celeron D331) if you have a good GPU. Nowadays its impossible. They are quite a bottleneck to GPUs.

mbarnes86 · Mar 2, 2014

Hi

However Celerons (last 3 generations) are still better than Intel Atoms
There are some low power versions for laptops which out perform Atoms but don't use much more power.

Not much use in a desk top PC with a graphics card or high resolution screen or multi tasking

Regards

Mike Barnes

khicharkumar · Mar 2, 2014

Well about the Atoms. Actually they are mobile oriented <10W while Celerons now tackles 35W segment. So celerons are like 3x-4x faster than atoms/

satyamdubey · Mar 2, 2014

^ yep Kichar, you are bang on with the max resolution that the celrons can drive games at. However, it is should not be impossible for it to drive a mid range card like a7770 in games like BF3 and Skyrim with medium settings at 900p. correct me if I am wrong. unlike you, I do not have as much experience with celerons.

CTurbo · Mar 2, 2014

The g1610, g1620, g1630, g1810, g1820, and g1830 are really capable dual core cpus. They are way stronger than any AMD dual core, and are as strong as some slightly older AMD quad cores. They make perfectly capable cpus for "office uses" and regular web browsing.

khicharkumar · Mar 2, 2014

satyamdubey :

At 1600*900 current Celeron's can run current games in low-med setting with a starter GPU like 7770 or 7790 (260X).
But game like Crysis 3,BF 4,COD Ghosts have to lowered on the minimal details (which even though looks good).

Search

Celeron still garbage?

nyxanna

Distinguished

Trave

Honorable

khicharkumar

Distinguished

satyamdubey

Distinguished

khicharkumar

Distinguished

khicharkumar

Distinguished

mbarnes86

Splendid

khicharkumar

Distinguished

satyamdubey

Distinguished

CTurbo

Pizza Monster

khicharkumar

Distinguished

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page