Need Help, Pentium 967 vs Celeron 877?

[Gearbox]

I origianally posted this in the Notebook Forum. About 50 people looked at it but so far I have not gotten any replies so I thought I would try the CPU section.

I want to pick up one of the new Acer 756 Netbooks with the ULV Intel CPU's and was having a little trouble figuring out the difference between the Pentium 967 and the Celeron 877 CPU's (other than the slight difference in clock speed). I looked on the Intel website and both chips look identical except the Celeron has VT and the Pentium does not (actually I compared a P-967 to a C-867 because the C-877 is not listed).

I remember a few years ago a Celeron was the same chip as the Pentium but with some of the internal memory disabled so it could be sold at a lower price point. When comparing these two chips today they appear identical except the Celeron has VT enabled, so at the same clock speed the Celeron would seem like the better chip?

Is there something I am missing? I supposed a week after I buy one they will release the Pentium 987 version and it will have some of the extra features turned on which would make the Pentium the premium part, and two weeks from now they will release Ivy Bridge making the Pentium Obsolete, but I need to choose from what is available now.

I figure if anybody knew they would be here on the AnandTech Forum. Thanks in advance for your help,

Ron G.

 

[sm625]

That should be the only difference. It is nice to see these chips finally being used. It is too bad they get so little attention. Faster than brazos in same power envelope. These chips are more powerful than what is running in most notebooks today, mine included.

 

[ninaholic37]

Faster than brazos in same power envelope. These chips are more powerful than what is running in most notebooks today, mine included.

Can their "HD Graphics" support DX10.1 and DX11 like Brazos?

http://www.intel.com/support/graphics/intel915g/sb/cs-011807.htm
(doesn't appear to)

They don't seem to support hyper-threading either. Atom 4-threads FTW? :awe:

(I'm sure they're good... just a few things I found interesting in comparison).

 

[Wizlem]

I feel bad for the people buying either of these processors and then attempting to play a DX11 or DX10.1 games.

In the past Pentium was the high end chip, now its a budget brand just like celeron. I believe you are correct in the assumption that they are pretty much the same thing.

If they release anymore sandybridge based processors, the only likely improvement is going to be 100Mhz faster clocks on the new parts.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I feel bad for the people buying either of these processors and then attempting to play a DX11 or DX10.1 games.

I feel bad for anyone using iGPUs, Including Llano, Trinity etc trying to play in DX10.1 or 11. Good thing 99.9x% of new games are still DX9 only. And even those with DX10/11 paths usually got a DX9 mode too.

Even HD7970, GTX670, GTX680 would struggle hard under a game that fully utilized DX11. And not just used one or 2 features to slap on a DX11 tag.

 

[pantsaregood]

In the past Pentium was the high end chip, now its a budget brand just like celeron. I believe you are correct in the assumption that they are pretty much the same thing.

Pentium is actually a performance grade above Celeron. The real world differences are very minor because Intel doesn't make sense with their branding conventions, but they're there.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Anyway, I'm not even seeing the Celeron on Intel's site.

 

[Tuna-Fish]

That should be the only difference. It is nice to see these chips finally being used. It is too bad they get so little attention.

ULV chips are the lowest-consuming chips selected from among the normal chips. As such, their production quantity is pretty limited, and somewhat unpredictable. They get little attention because as their production cannot be stepped up, they cannot be used to replace other options.

 

[Gearbox]

Thanks for all the feedback. Since both chips have similiar spec's I went with the Celeron 877 system because it has the faster clock and was $30 cheaper than the Pentium 967 system. I'm pretty sure there are no Acer Netbooks with the Pentium 987 chips available yet.

I wanted a small Netbook that I could stuff in a backpack for an upcoming trip. I liked the Acer A0756 because it came with 4GB, but could also be upgraded to 8GB down the road. Eventually I will add a SSD as well. I don't intend to do much with high end video games on this machine, it's mainly for staying in touch and running Office type apps.

Thanks again for all the help,
Ron G.

 

[ninaholic37]

Miku loves Fluttershy and QBQBQB/Puella Magi Madoka Magica as well!

 

[mijk3320]

I feel bad for the people buying either of these processors and then attempting to play a DX11 or DX10.1 games.

In the past Pentium was the high end chip, now its a budget brand just like celeron. I believe you are correct in the assumption that they are pretty much the same thing.

If they release anymore sandybridge based processors, the only likely improvement is going to be 100Mhz faster clocks on the new parts.

Well said mate.

 

[Yuriman]

Does the Pentium have more graphics cores enabled or something?

 

[ninaholic37]

Does the Pentium have more graphics cores enabled or something?

I can't find much info about the "generic Intel® HD Graphics" either...

On Wikipedia, the details for Celeron B8x0 / Pentium B9x0 (mobile) are exactly the same:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Intel_graphics_processing_units#Intel_HD_Graphics

Even on Intel's PDF, both integrated graphics are interchangeably grouped together:
http://download.intel.com/design/intarch/prodbref/325628.pdf

 

[Zap]

Does the Pentium have more graphics cores enabled or something?

I can't find much info about the "generic Intel® HD Graphics" either...

On Wikipedia, the details for Celeron B8x0 / Pentium B9x0 (mobile) are exactly the same:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Intel_graphics_processing_units#Intel_HD_Graphics

AFAIK they both have 6 graphics cores running at the same speed. It isn't "HD 2000" because it lacks QuickSync support.