Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on FacebookIntel Low-End Processors Performance Comparison
@ 2008/09/11We continue our series of large-scale tests aimed at dotting all i's in regard to various processor families of AMD and Intel -- if not for good, then at least for a long time. In the previous review we took a look at the entire Athlon 64 X2 family. This time we are going to review three entire processor series at once: Intel Celeron based on the new core, Intel Celeron dual-core and Intel Pentium dual-core (also known as "Pentium E2xxx").
Dual-core Celeron processors performed considerably better than single-core ones. But this series looks rather strange: 1.6 GHz Celeron E1200 is followed by 2 GHz Celeron E1400 and the performance gap in between is very wide. An intermediate 1.8 GHz Celeron E1300 would be a logical addition, and we have no idea why it hasn't been made.
Celeron 420The Pentium dual-core series surprised us twice. First pleasantly, by decent performance for such a small cache; and then unpleasantly, by being unfit for games -- dream on about cheap gaming rigs.
Celeron 430
Celeron 440
Celeron E1200
Celeron E1400
Pentium E2140
Pentium E2160
Pentium E2180
Pentium E2200
Pentium E2220
Core 2 Duo E4300
Core 2 Duo E4400
Core 2 Duo E4500
Core 2 Duo E4600
Dual-core Celeron processors performed considerably better than single-core ones. But this series looks rather strange: 1.6 GHz Celeron E1200 is followed by 2 GHz Celeron E1400 and the performance gap in between is very wide. An intermediate 1.8 GHz Celeron E1300 would be a logical addition, and we have no idea why it hasn't been made.
