Celeron 847 (Sandy Bridge) is barely faster than Pentium su4100 (Intel's 1st mobile)?

[JEDI]

i was looking to upgrade my 11.6" su4100 netbook. saw a 11.6" celeron 847 for $190 shipped.
looked up the specs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Ultra-Low_Voltage
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/midlow_range_cpus.html

celeron 847: 1016
su4100: 908

the su4100 is intel's first dual core mobile processor.

why is a sandy bridge based proc only slightly faster than the first proc?

 

[richierich1212]

i was looking to upgrade my 11.6" su4100 netbook. saw a 11.6" celeron 847 for $190 shipped.
looked up the specs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Ultra-Low_Voltage
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/midlow_range_cpus.html

celeron 847: 1016
su4100: 908

the su4100 is intel's first dual core mobile processor.

why is a sandy bridge based proc only slightly faster than the first proc?

Just because it's a sandy doesn't mean it has pixie dust, lol. It's still a celeron, bottom of the barrel. The SU4100 was one of the more expensive processors in that lineup.

 

[Vesku]

Dual core 1.1 GHz: 1016 = 923.6/GHz
Dual core 1.3 GHz: 908 = 698.5/GHz

I think your main complaint comes down to "Why isn't the Celeron 847 clocked at 1.3GHz?".

 

[dave_the_nerd]

There's a limit to what you can do in 10w. Mobile Haswell will presumably improve the situation, though.

 

[SPBHM]

1.1GHz, no HT, no Turbo, 2MB l3, no AVX, it still is a SB, but a really slow one, if you look here

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/celeron-847_5.html

it's much closer to Bobcat/Atom territory than to desktop Celeron.... the low clock is the main problem.

 

[meloz]

i was looking to upgrade my 11.6" su4100 netbook. saw a 11.6" celeron 847 for $190 shipped.
looked up the specs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumer_Ultra-Low_Voltage
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/midlow_range_cpus.html

celeron 847: 1016
su4100: 908

the su4100 is intel's first dual core mobile processor.

why is a sandy bridge based proc only slightly faster than the first proc?

Celerons are crippleware, basically. The way Intel has segmented its mobile products, to get benefits of newer generation processor and iGPU in a netbook format you have to buy an 'ultrabook'.

 

[Hubb1e]

The su4100 does pretty well for my wife still. I dropped in an SSD and it's fast enough for web and basic photo work. She's got a desktop with an i5 3570k and she uses the su4100 laptop more than her desktop. That said, you'd be better off jumping up to a Pentium at least. I'd just bite the bullet and get an i5 for the turbo boost in single threaded Apps. An i5 Haswell or even ivy will last you a long time for a light usage model and longevity is more important than a cheap initial price imo.

 

[Matt1970]

The laptop celerons are pretty bad. There are some dual core mobile celerons that are a little better but that still are pretty bad.

 

[sm625]

There are other celerons, the 887 for example, is a faster 847 and it scores a decent 1420 on passmark. That is nearly twice as fast as core 2 ULV.

Now there is the celeron 1007U which scores the same as a 887 but should have even better graphics. This is a chip that will probably be pitted against jaguar pricewise and will probably outperform it in cpu and gpu. I wish I could say for sure but there are zero reviews.

There is a mITX mobo combo featuring the celeron 1007U for under $100:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128598

There is a Lenovo Thinkpad X131e featuring this chip.

You can get an Inspiron 15 (Inspiron 3521) for $343 which features this chip. This isnt even a sale price.

 

[dave_the_nerd]

Ooh, I wish I'd known about that 1007U a couple weeks ago.

Hmm... I guess I need to convince myself saving $20 and getting an 847 was the right thing. BRB, getting more vodka.

 

[Sheep221]

Celerons are crippleware, basically. The way Intel has segmented its mobile products, to get benefits of newer generation processor and iGPU in a netbook format you have to buy an 'ultrabook'.

the sandy bridge desktop celerons are quite good I bought the G465 single core out of curiosity and I was really surprised how fast it is and consumes just 15W under full load

the ultrabook stuff, you are right

 

[AkumaX]

There are other celerons, the 887 for example, is a faster 847 and it scores a decent 1420 on passmark. That is nearly twice as fast as core 2 ULV.

Now there is the celeron 1007U which scores the same as a 887 but should have even better graphics. This is a chip that will probably be pitted against jaguar pricewise and will probably outperform it in cpu and gpu. I wish I could say for sure but there are zero reviews.

There is a mITX mobo combo featuring the celeron 1007U for under $100:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813128598

There is a Lenovo Thinkpad X131e featuring this chip.

You can get an Inspiron 15 (Inspiron 3521) for $343 which features this chip. This isnt even a sale price.

pretty cool! i'm always tempted to get the mini-itx mobo that has a soldered on celeron 847, but this...

 

[SPBHM]

The laptop celerons are pretty bad. There are some dual core mobile celerons that are a little better but that still are pretty bad.

I wouldn't call pretty bad, from my experience with the b820 it was pretty decent (1.7GHz compared to 1.1 from the 847) for a low cost CPU (much faster than bobcat and Atom)

this 1007U looks pretty good, it should perform close to the b820 at half the TDP.

ivy bridge 1.5GHz (1007U) vs sandy bridge 1.1GHz (847) should make a big difference.

 

[Roland00Address]

Lets put it this way

The new intel atoms that are coming out in less than 6 months are supposed to replace the crappy 847 and other crappy intel celeron/pentium ulv.

The current intel atom n2760 scores 679 in passmark.
If they improve the per core performance by 30% (due to moving to OoO and higher clock speed) we are getting in the 850 to 900 range.

Some of the new intel atoms will be quad cores, 850x2 will be about 1600/1700 in passmark.

 

[TerryMathews]

Laptop Celerons have been terrible forever. I remember in the P4 generation the Celerons were lacking Speed Step.

That's like Chevy selling the base model without a carburetor.

 

[SPBHM]

Some of the new intel atoms will be quad cores, 850x2 will be about 1600/1700 in passmark.

Intel Celeron 1000M @ 1.80GHz 1,815

the single thread performance difference is going to be big, and in the real world you can still be limited by ST performance, I would rather use an ivy bridge Celeron than a CPU with the same MT performance with 4 cores.

Laptop Celerons have been terrible forever. I remember in the P4 generation the Celerons were lacking Speed Step.

That's like Chevy selling the base model without a carburetor.

Celeron M (Banias) and many others were pretty good options,

 

[TerryMathews]

Celeron M (Banias) and many others were pretty good options,

Any idea when they finally let the Celerons have Speed Step?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Any idea when they finally let the Celerons have Speed Step?

They already do.

http://ark.intel.com/products/56056/Intel-Celeron-Processor-847-2M-Cache-1_10-GHz

 

[TerryMathews]

They already do.

http://ark.intel.com/products/56056/Intel-Celeron-Processor-847-2M-Cache-1_10-GHz

Yes, I know they have it now. When was the operative word in my sentence.

 

[SPBHM]

Any idea when they finally let the Celerons have Speed Step?

they had a few rare models with it enabled before, but the entire Celeron line received speedstep with Arrandale I think (2010)

 

[Matt1970]

I wouldn't call pretty bad, from my experience with the b820 it was pretty decent (1.7GHz compared to 1.1 from the 847) for a low cost CPU (much faster than bobcat and Atom)

this 1007U looks pretty good, it should perform close to the b820 at half the TDP.

ivy bridge 1.5GHz (1007U) vs sandy bridge 1.1GHz (847) should make a big difference.

The B820 isn't bad but it still benchmarks right around mid level processors from 5 or 6 years ago. Atleast it isn't an AMD C-60.

 

[Roland00Address]

Intel Celeron 1000M @ 1.80GHz 1,815

the single thread performance difference is going to be big, and in the real world you can still be limited by ST performance, I would rather use an ivy bridge Celeron than a CPU with the same MT performance with 4 cores,

That is a 35 watt tdp chip, and that 35 watts do not even include the pch which is another 4 to 7 watts.

The z2670 atom has a tdp of less than 2 watts

 

[dbcooper1]

Laptop Celerons have been terrible forever. I remember in the P4 generation the Celerons were lacking Speed Step.

That's like Chevy selling the base model without a carburetor.

How long has it been since a Chevy anything had a carburetor?

 

[jhu]

How long has it been since a Chevy anything had a carburetor?

In the USA it's 1989

 

[SPBHM]

The B820 isn't bad but it still benchmarks right around mid level processors from 5 or 6 years ago. Atleast it isn't an AMD C-60.

it's 2x+ a C-60.

sure it's not impressive compared to some higher model Core 2 Duo, but that that's a much higher level of performance than even the 2.1GHz Atom, the 17w 1007U (1.5GHz Ivy bridge) should perform around the same,

I don't know if it's of any use (but it's close to the 1007U I think, apart from the faster IGP), but a few results I got with the 1.7GHz Sandy Bridge Celeron a year ago (with single channel memory)
Winrar CB11.5 3dm06

now 1.5GHz Kabini (5000) can beat the 06 CPU and CB11.5 MT results, but not by a huge margin.

That is a 35 watt tdp chip, and that 35 watts do not even include the pch which is another 4 to 7 watts.

The z2670 atom has a tdp of less than 2 watts

the 1007U is 17w and "only" 300MHz lower.

a comparable Atom would not only use 2W.

In the USA it's 1989

Nascar used carburetors until 2011 :biggrin: