Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Intel: Atom is Eating into Celeron, and That's OK

By - Source: Tom's Hardware US | B 27 comments

That's not the same as eating celery, right?

These days when someone is in the market for a portable computer, the choices now include netbooks. Most casual internet users mainly surf the web according to their interests and keep communicate via email and social networking sites.

With netbooks being the inexpensive solutions that they are, it’s easy to see why they’re eating into sales of notebooks. In fact, Intel puts netbook cannibalization of notebooks at around 16 percent – which means that the notebook segment lost around a sixth of its sales to the cheaper netbooks. This is of some concern to the industry as lower priced products could mean lower profits, but Intel doesn’t seem worried.

In fact, Intel argues that netbooks aren’t exactly taking over notebooks, at least not in a negative way, and has more untapped selling potential.

“The market has not all lept over to Netbooks,” said Intel Chief Sales and Marketing Officer Sean Maloney, according to CNet. “We're very comfortable with having established the (Netbook) category. We believe now that Netbooks are an under-distributed product line.”

Those looking to get a laptop for cheap are likely looking at Celeron-powered machine, and if the consumer buys an Atom instead, that doesn’t bother Intel.

“Atom is eating into Celeron. And we're quite fine with this,” Maloney said.

“There's great concern about the potential of the Atom mix because it's a lower selling price product, but it's also a lower cost product,” said Intel CFO Stacy Smith in a Reuters story. “And that cost really enables us to ramp it without having an adverse effect on the overall product margin of the business.”

Smith added that the Intel Atom costs a quarter of what it does to produce a quad-core chip (without specifying which quad-core).

This summer those shopping for a laptop will get another option thanks to Intel rolling out CULV (consumer ultra low voltage) chips that’ll enable affordable thin and light notebooks priced between netbooks and full-featured notebooks. We’ll likely get to see more of those at Computex next week.

Discuss
Display all 27 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 13 Hide
    leafblower29 , May 29, 2009 12:34 AM
    Well why don't they get rid of the Celeron? It's not like anyone will miss it.
Other Comments
  • 13 Hide
    leafblower29 , May 29, 2009 12:34 AM
    Well why don't they get rid of the Celeron? It's not like anyone will miss it.
  • 0 Hide
    tacoslave , May 29, 2009 12:48 AM
    a quarter of what it costs to make a quad core!!?!??!?!?! atom what the hell?? so why the hell do they sell the damn quads so expensive!?!? was it the developement costs or what. I think its time the introduce the 100< dollar core 2 quad.

    http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/30/atom-processor-to-cost-intel-just-6-to-8/
  • 0 Hide
    joefriday , May 29, 2009 12:58 AM
    The Celeron Needs to be single core with HT, and have REAL speedstep. Then I would think Celeron would be a great budget CPU. The current single core Conroe-L celeron is pretty good, but HT ability would make it even more usable, and a speedstep with ultra-low voltage/MHz at idle (e.g. bring back the Pentium M power states) would make it a delight for a low power everyday machine. Don't really care for the Dual core Celerons. I feel that gap should instead be filled with faster single core Celerons and let the Pentium Dual core be Intel's entry into real multicore processing.
  • 5 Hide
    liemfukliang , May 29, 2009 1:25 AM
    If I have to choose $400 I will buy a normal laptop with Celeron. Why? Because it is fully functional laptop with a fully functional screen (14").
  • 0 Hide
    Luscious , May 29, 2009 1:46 AM
    If Intel does indeed plan to introduce a dual-core Atom this year or next year with Medfield, I see no reason why the Celeron brand should stay on. Even cheap desktops being sold today are now using the Atom.
  • 5 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 2:22 AM
    If only Atom wasn't slower than a Celeron... Computer's are supposed to get faster over time, AFAIK this is the first time they've ever gotten slower... Well done.
  • 1 Hide
    cybot_x1024 , May 29, 2009 2:26 AM
    just like we will have i5/p57 and i7/x58
  • 0 Hide
    belardo , May 29, 2009 3:17 AM
    Because vista is a resouce hog that will totally bog down a P3 1.x type of CPU (such as the atom) which otherwise runs okay on a little computer with a little bitty battery... that is what is made for. Low power, cost & size

    If price is a factor, the AMD64 X2 dual core CPUs are $30~60 and are easily several times more powerful than Atom, Celerons and Pentium Dual Core, which these AMDs are fine for desktops and can run Vista/Win7.
  • -2 Hide
    sonofliberty08 , May 29, 2009 3:22 AM
    Celeron was a main crap , it can't even compete with the Sempron :p 
  • 0 Hide
    industrial_zman , May 29, 2009 3:38 AM
    ok for those who haven't been really keeping up with processors, a Celeron CPU is the same core as a current main stream processor. In this case, the current mobile Celeron is a C2 Merom or Penryn. What's the difference? Lower FSB, no support for virtualization and lower amount of cache on chip. And haven't been confirmed yet, but there are rumors from my Intel buddies that there are dual core Celerons on their way to notebooks by the end of the year.

    joefriday, the Celeron brand has had REAL speedstep since Jan 08, started with the 1000 series.

    luscious, Atom chips are already dual core AND HT to boot. check out the Atom N330. now what I'm hoping for in the future is a native dual core Atom. Intel is not looking at releasing the next version of the Atom until they have exhausted their supply of old crusty inventory of 945GC chips first. In the mean time, they can play court with nVidia over the Ion and refine the next generation of Atom to truely be a native x86(x64) SOC.
  • -2 Hide
    cabose369 , May 29, 2009 4:17 AM
    BelardoBecause vista is a resouce hog that will totally bog down a P3 1.x type of CPU (such as the atom) which otherwise runs okay on a little computer with a little bitty battery... that is what is made for.


    I like when people like you talk out of their ass when they have absolutely no idea wtf they are talking about.....

    I have an HP 1035NR netbook with an Atom Processor and I AM RUNNING VISTA ULTIMATE ON IT!!! And guess what???? It runs GREAT!!! The only thing that sucks is GMA graphics but that's Intel's fault...

    So don't bash Vista when you have no idea what your talking about... Vista isn't a resource hog... you are just a noob who doesn't know how to use it or configure it correctly...
  • 0 Hide
    jaragon13 , May 29, 2009 10:28 AM
    Wow Intel made a good point, a SINGLE core costs A FOURTH of what it costs to make a QUAD core. >.>
    No ****, sherlock.
  • 0 Hide
    smalltime0 , May 29, 2009 11:25 AM
    cabose369I like when people like you talk out of their ass when they have absolutely no idea wtf they are talking about.....I have an HP 1035NR netbook with an Atom Processor and I AM RUNNING VISTA ULTIMATE ON IT!!! And guess what???? It runs GREAT!!! The only thing that sucks is GMA graphics but that's Intel's fault...So don't bash Vista when you have no idea what your talking about... Vista isn't a resource hog... you are just a noob who doesn't know how to use it or configure it correctly...

    Its likely he, and all the people who negative voted your post have never used vista at all, some post-SP1 and are basing their opnion purely on rumour.
  • 0 Hide
    captaincharisma , May 29, 2009 11:41 AM
    man i been waiting for Celeron to die for years. Its just not worth the saving's to have a slow and crippled CPU like that
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 1:41 PM
    I Have a Celeron E1200 running my home server and would not trade it for an atom EVER. Core2 architecture is way more advanced and I got the chip for $55CAD. Also it fits in a full size board with a SATA raid card and 2 PCI TV Tuners. Suck on that ATOM.
  • -2 Hide
    tipoo , May 29, 2009 2:09 PM
    Honestly, no one's going to hiss the Celeron.
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 4:56 PM
    More like netbooks the size of 2LCD screens, but only having 1 LCD screen and a keyboard.
    Asus had rumors of selling a "keyboard pc" (meaning everything is in the keyboard, just connect the mouse and screen to it and you're ready to go!
  • -3 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 5:06 PM
    cabose369.....I have an HP 1035NR netbook with an Atom Processor and I AM RUNNING VISTA ULTIMATE ON IT!!! And guess what???? It runs GREAT!!! The only thing that sucks is GMA graphics but that's Intel's fault...So don't bash Vista when you have no idea what your talking about... Vista isn't a resource hog... you are just a noob who doesn't know how to use it or configure it correctly...

    1- Try running your vista, a youtube video at full screen while having a virus scanner installed and with AERO on, I mean, that's why you buy vista no? Vista is sloppy even on my C2D 2Ghz laptop!
    2- Intel makes the GMA chipset, so it is their fault!
    3- Vista is worlds greatest recource hog OS! Can't think of any other OS working so sloppy, no Linux, No other windows, no Mac.. They're all more responsive!
    4- You can configure Vista all you want! You can cripple it by disabling services but then you no longer are running Vista. Disabling services makes your OS not run certain tasks; while you can do everything Vista can in XP with half the resources.

    Ow, and seemingly you know more about calling people bad words than you know something about pc's!
  • 2 Hide
    captaincharisma , May 29, 2009 5:48 PM
    Quote:
    1- Try running your vista, a youtube video at full screen while having a virus scanner installed and with AERO on, I mean, that's why you buy vista no? Vista is sloppy even on my C2D 2Ghz laptop!
    2- Intel makes the GMA chipset, so it is their fault!
    3- Vista is worlds greatest recource hog OS! Can't think of any other OS working so sloppy, no Linux, No other windows, no Mac.. They're all more responsive!
    4- You can configure Vista all you want! You can cripple it by disabling services but then you no longer are running Vista. Disabling services makes your OS not run certain tasks; while you can do everything Vista can in XP with half the resources.

    Ow, and seemingly you know more about calling people bad words than you know something about pc's!



    LOL here's another sheep on the "hate vista" bandwagon. if he had these problems with disabling stuff he wouldn't have mentioned it. sounds like he just has a better laptop or netbook than you
  • 0 Hide
    Anonymous , May 29, 2009 10:16 PM
    I've got a Celeron 1200 running secondary to my quad-core, makes for a very usable light-medium duty workstation for my better half.

    That said, I'd do An Atom N330 on Ion in a heartbeat instead if the case it went in was half decently laid out...
Display more comments