Here come Wolfdale and Yorkfield as well. At competitive prices.
The Celeron Dual core has a 65W Tdp. Will be interesting to see what architecture this is. (core 2 lite?)
AMD watch out...

But not for DAAMIT.

A Core based dual core CPU at the price will push out high sempron, low-med athlon, and low athlon x2s (36/38/ossibly4000 ), bad for AMD, good for intel, im all for it.

The Celeron line has always been horrible. You're better off buying the lower line of Core2 duo processors. BOO CELERON!

[Celeron is a brand name, not an architecture. It represents a certain class of processors. These have included products back from Pentium III, Pentium IV, Core and eventually Core 2. -Rick]

Core2 user, I disagree. Celerons weren't terrible, and still aren't. They are entry level, and are pretty good for people who don't need a powerful CPU. Some of them were pretty good, even. I had a Celeron 300A, which was certainly an enthusiast's favourite at its time.

It's good that Intel is transitioning its entry level to dual core. That'd make dual core even more of a standard.

This could have potential as an overclocker depending if it comes from the same manufacturing line as some of the core2's. Not sure how much the 512 KB L2 will affect performance, though.

To the last guy. Celeron didn't always stand for underperforming processors. Remember the Celeron 300A? That was one of the best overclockers of the time. On air cooling it easily overclocked to 450 MHz and outperformed many of the the Pentium II's.

OK, this idea seems nice at first, until you see the name "celeron" OMG!!!! It's specs don't look too bad for a $54 chip. I'm going to hold off on full dislike until I see the test score tho.

The celeron with Tualatin-core @ 1.2GHz could in some tests outperform a northwood-celeron @ 2.4-2.6GHz.

uhmm discovery of the century here it goes guys:

If AMD goes out of business, what prices will intel charge for processors.... i guess they will give us a discount huh? like OPEC ? LoL...

I agree with Core2 user (NOOO!! WHY CAN'T CELERON DIE?)

What's the point of Celeron any more? The Core CPU line-up is impressive and has stayed affordable. Please just give us a nice single core Core CPU at the Celeron cost!

I mean... we know intel gets a pretty nice boost off Cache, unlike AMD which isn't as Cache dependant. That's why double the Cache on an AMD processor isn't as good or important as double cache on an intel processor. Still good but not great.

I don't think this Celeron will be able to outperform Athlons X2 on the same price level.

Still thumbs up to intel for making something extremely cheap. It is always good to have more selection and even allows some strange "gift" setups. I'm pretty sure a 500$ celeron/amd HD3850 will own owns any XBOX 360 at streaming videos.

the problem is the crappy motherboard and substandard parts that they always put in the celeron machines. I thought they already a "celeron" type processor in a duel core chip called "pentium"

I will develop a 128 cores CPU with 1 Gb DDR4 of L1 cache, 4 Gb DDR 4 of L2 cache and i will sell it for 1 dollar each and it will be available for 775, AM2, AM2 , AM3 sockets for this Christmas 2007 !!! So this stupid and silly war between Intel and AMD fans will be finally over !!!

I’ve been an Intel user since the beginning, but even I recognize the fact that if it were not for AMD, Intel processors would probably be running at 2Ghz, have one core and cost three times as much as they do now. I guess all these Fanboys for Intel or AMD fail to understand that its competition that brings better and cheaper products, and with AMD in trouble eventually it could mean higher prices, slower processors, and less innovation, like in the old days before AMD. Just look at the Windows OS, and the way Microsoft behaves with late patches, high prices, and an OS that’s so bloated that no matter how fast the processors get, the OS sucks all the life out of it. If you really want to know just how fast today’s processors are uninstall Vista and put on XP, and then exchange it for 2000, then NT, you’ll be blown away. I say thank god for AMD and I hope they recover soon.

Why waste time and resources on Dual Core Celerons. Just move on already. Stick with the Dual Core Pentiums as the low end processors. That's what most of the cheap computers have in them now anyway.

This is the real news of the digitimes article:
Q9450 $316 2.66GHz/12MB L2/1333MHz FSB

My next desktop processor...

i thought celeron D's were dual core as well....and havent they been out since pentium D's?

The celeron may have outperformed PII's but it is only because you clocked it much higher. Clock for clock a celeron IS pretty weak but I will agree it is still an "alright" CPU for any general user.

This Celly doesn't appear to be that bad. It does have the same cache as the old full P4 chip @ 512K, for which so many applications were compiled to use (and the reason why the 128K cache old Celly was so poor at performance). It should perform on the same grounds as a good P4 chip if not better, though may fall behind the full core 2. But, then again, that's why they are selling it, right?

Will probably be a POS.............

The low end am2 dual core have 512 512 l2 and there build in memory controller means that need less l2 then a intel FSB setup.

Celerons have always and will always be a budget, hamstrung offering that enables Intel to maintain a presence in the bottom of the heap, junk end of the cpu hardware market.

Overclocking has nothing to do with product placement in the CPU business (I can hear the matches lighting and just dont care).

Overclocking an Intel Celeron CPU voids its warranty - therefore the "value" of the part is further reduced as it doesnt even have a warranty any more.

Celerons, when compared to current mainstream processors, have always had a limited front side bus, limited cache and limited cpu speed. These have been the penalties you the consumer pay in return for a slightly cheaper (to purchase) product.

They are still junk and it is still a discrace that they are on the market. The sooner the general public (thats you over there with the match, about to tell me how wrong I am) gets this into their head and boycots junk hardware like celeron, the sooner the IT world will head towards the place it should be.

Therefore, I must agree with Core2User who has hit the nail squarly on the head - You are better off buying a low end core2duo part.

Celeron is a BRAND. The brand is "Value", which in the real world means substandard (un-necessarialy limited) parts, substandard performance and no value to the consumer at all. If you cant work that out then there is no hope for you as this simple principal governs every purchase you will ever make for the rest of your life, not just your computers cpu.

PS: This has nothing to do with AMD, they are so far behind the game that they are all but insignificant. Hopefully one day fate will smile on AMD and they will make products that truly compete on a speed, heat, noise (water/peltier excluded) and price basis.

I am ready to try dual Celeron with DDR3 and PCIE 2.0

I hope that will be faster than the older 3.0 dual core Pentium D

http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=158640

Yeah. Junk. Dang those 200% OC's
(Rolling Eyes)

That cedar mill Celeron D 360 @ 7.3Ghz was done using liquid Nitrogen. And is not usable.

LINK: http://www.nordichardware.com/news,5493.html

This Celly is better than an old standard P4 chip, which still is the vast majority of computers in use today. So what you have "I hate celeron" guys have to say about that?

Really? Better than an old standard P4? So where did you get this information? Please link me to the benchmarks. Either that, or admit that you're talking out of your a$$. You mentioned an old standard P4 chip, so I assume you are referring to the P4s from 5 to 7 years ago. If that's the case I can show you a stack of benchmarks where a 2 year old AMD Sempron can blow those out of the water so frankly, it's nothing to brag about.

Today, in the value segment a Sempron smokes Celeron, Athlon64 smokes Celeron, X2 smokes Celeron.

Athlon 64 X2 4000 $60. For this a price a celeron is absolutely useless. Even if they can put a core2duo with 1333fsb, the tiny cache it's a huge penalty if the processor don't have build in memory.

Athlon LE-1620 2.4 single-core $50.


Just kill Celeron for the market's sake. Core2Quad/Duo Q9000/E8000/E6000/E4000 and Pentium dual core ¿isn't PDC the value option?