So why is it that Intel is still making the Celeron & Pentium CPU's in every new line they release. Why don't just they stop making them and make the i3 the the entry level CPU. They are very slow and i3 out performs by miles so why not make the i3 the new Celeron & Pentium?
Why Is Intel Still Making Celeron & Pentium CPU's?
- Thread starter BK_123
- Start date
Craig Prince
In Runtime
- Messages
- 475
- Location
- United States
The only reason I can see is that if an i3 was was the worst Intel CPU it would be much more difficult to make the $300 PCs you see at like Walmart. Then you could say well make the price $400 instead and give it an i3, but the reason they don't do that is because they would lose business to the people that don't have the now extra $100 to spend on a new PC.
jarlmaster
In Runtime
- Messages
- 473
- Location
- USA
+1 Intel has to have cheap options too.
When the CPUs are tested they are sorted to Celeron, Pentium, i3, i5 and i7. Less waste. Not all silicon chips come out perfect thus the grading.
By the way, I had a Celeron G540 before I upgraded to an i3. The Celeron's quite a good performer for the cost ($50).
By the way, I had a Celeron G540 before I upgraded to an i3. The Celeron's quite a good performer for the cost ($50).
connchri
Daemon Poster
- Messages
- 1,025
- Location
- Scotland, UK
A lot of it is to do with marketing and brand power.
Don't kid yourself - brand names such as Pentium and Celeron are powerful in the marketing game. Intel would be daft dropping them. If anything, if I were Intel and in the mood to cut product lines, I would reduce the types of "Core" CPUs from core i3, i5 & i7 to just Core (Btw, I'm not suggesting they do, I just think if they were to do so, that's where to start).
People outside the tech community have heard of the Pentium and Celeron. A lot of people have some idea that they have something to do with computing. I would put money on it that random Joe Bloggs on the street would recognise the brand names Pentium and Celeron much more readily than Core i3, i5, i7.
In regards to the performance differences, and why they are covering all the market, quite simply is because that market exists. I have a NAS box, with a 10 Watt Celeron (Current Generation) CPU at it's heart. I'm not interested in performance from this thing, I'm interested in it's low DTP, and stability. Pentium can fit similar systems, or embedded systems, where the Core series would be overkill.
It sells, it makes a profit, it's a valuable identifiable brand name - who in their right mind would drop it??
Don't kid yourself - brand names such as Pentium and Celeron are powerful in the marketing game. Intel would be daft dropping them. If anything, if I were Intel and in the mood to cut product lines, I would reduce the types of "Core" CPUs from core i3, i5 & i7 to just Core (Btw, I'm not suggesting they do, I just think if they were to do so, that's where to start).
People outside the tech community have heard of the Pentium and Celeron. A lot of people have some idea that they have something to do with computing. I would put money on it that random Joe Bloggs on the street would recognise the brand names Pentium and Celeron much more readily than Core i3, i5, i7.
In regards to the performance differences, and why they are covering all the market, quite simply is because that market exists. I have a NAS box, with a 10 Watt Celeron (Current Generation) CPU at it's heart. I'm not interested in performance from this thing, I'm interested in it's low DTP, and stability. Pentium can fit similar systems, or embedded systems, where the Core series would be overkill.
It sells, it makes a profit, it's a valuable identifiable brand name - who in their right mind would drop it??
