Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Ivy Bridge Celeron > Sandy Bridge Pentium?

Last response: in CPUs
Share
a b à CPUs
February 25, 2013 4:45:44 PM

I know it is common to see Sandy Bridgey Pentium G600 and G800 processors recommended as excellent budget processors. However, I have noticed the new Ivy Bridge Celeron G1610/1620 processors are in stock. Full retail on those is $50-60, $15-25 cheaper than the Sandy Bridge Pentiums. The only benchmarks I can find for them are on Passmark, but they seem to show that the 2.6Ghz G1610 is equal to a 2.9GHz Pentium G645, and the 2.7Ghz G1620 is equal to the 3.0/3.1Ghz G860/G870. Considering these are like processor families, can we consider the passmark score fairly reliable?

It seems like the G1610 might be a steal at $50 retail.
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2013 12:43:32 AM

Passmark is not real world score.celeron cannot perform like g645 or g860 + missing l3 cache of celeron
Related resources
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2013 2:55:54 AM

ASHISH65 said:
Passmark is not real world score.celeron cannot perform like g645 or g860 + missing l3 cache of celeron


I find passmark to be pretty reliable for processors with same number of cores. We are talking 2MB vs 3MB of L3 cache, but the Ivy Bridge Celeron has 50% more memory bandwidth. I think I believe the score. But it's the only benchmark I have to go on, that's why I wanted to discuss.
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2013 3:12:08 AM

3Dmark Vantage also shows G1610 and G640 to both be right around 6700 and the same score on Physics and AI.

I understand synthetics are not perfect, but when enough of them agree, they are pretty dang close to real world.
a c 185 à CPUs
February 26, 2013 3:25:33 AM

Just buy those refurb HP's. :) 
a b à CPUs
February 26, 2013 4:06:48 AM

This was more of a matter of discussion! Although I found OEM G1610's for $40 and I just happen to have a stock HSF sitting here I can use. :) 

I often see the G860 recommended as a cheap i3 alternative, but I'm wondering if we shouldn't be saying Celeron now. Cheaper and uses less power, too. If it truly can perform the same, why not?

!