Opinions about Intel Celeron ...

For the ones who have these kind of processors,
- what is the 3D performance?,
- do you think a PC with an Intel Celeron (2Ghz or more) and a mid video card (128mb) can play video games at a decent FPS?
- do you think indie games should be playable in those PCs?

Thanks :)
Paolo.

Video games- yes.

Celeron @ 2.0ghz is NOT a good system, in fact, a celeron at 2.7 recently ran at the equivalent speed of an amd athlon xp2400.

Games? Anything really, its more up to the gfx card.

One of my machines is a 1.8 Celeron and it is totally bent at everything. I wish it had a handle to crank it up a bit and that's just doing daily tasks on it.

There are a lot of Celeron systems floating about that don't have AGP slots - other than the faggoty stickers on them claiming they are an AGP system.

They *are* agp. the AGP is built in to the motherboard, but the socket wasnt installed. I had one last time :D

You get what you pay for... Thats why I buy and install ALL my own parts... I used to buy BAREBONE and jack them up... now I just shop for what I want.

Do Celerons still have reduced CPU cache? A large cache can make a fair few fps difference when playing games.

i believe celeronDs have a decent cache...

i have 2 here, and the performance is pretty good, like someone said, with a decent video card...


--Mike

Yes with a decent graphics card you are looking at a couple of fps less.

And don't get me started on those AGP systems that don't actually have an AGP slot grrrr ;P

Well, I don't see any AGP performance from that little 1.8 faggot that I use.

Halve the speed and slice the VRAM to a quarter... and I'd still say yes.


I have to agree - the card is by far the most significant factor. For indie games, though, you shouldn't need a particularly good card (although I reserve the right to alter that opinion once I've actually tried to get a machine with integrated graphics to do something impressive).

celeron = poop BUT yes your games should play on them or you reduce target market by a huge wadge. Don't forget Durons and Semprons too.

i had a celeronD 2.5 ghz 256mb radeon gfx card 768mb ram and the procceser sucked so i upgraded but before putting in my new gfx card i tried my new amd athlon64 3000+ clocked at 2ghz and it out preformed the celeron by alot

i mean with the celeron setup igot 60 fps in a 6 year old game half life (Team Fortress Classic) with the new procceser it went to about 150 new gfx card i can get 400+ fps

Banshee: YEs, a Celeron has half the cache of a 'normal' pentium chip. A pentium has two cache modules on board -- if one of these doesn't pass the factory tests, the bank is disabled, and the chip is downgraded to and sold as a Celeron.
(There also are specific celeron production lines to fill demand, but a good portion are really partially defunct pentiums. It's a good way for Intel to recoup some of their losses, rather than just throwing away the chip with a bad cache bank)

Out of all available CPU's these days, Celerons truly are the bottom of the barrel, and by far the slowest chips when compared to others running at the same clock frequency. The only thing they have going for them is that they're cheap, but in most cases the small savings is still barely worth it.

I have a 2.9 ghz celeron...over in the Corner and it stay there for all I care..lol
Even with a 5900OC it could barley Run fable lost chapters.(Im talking FPs in the single digits)

I put the 5900OC in a (1800mhz)2200+ Xp and its runs Great.

Also the Celeron has 400mhz DDR while the athlon only has 266mhz DDR.
and both had 512.

maybe its just a bad one...but there ya go.

Sam

Thanks

Ok, so the list would be

PIV > AMD Athlon XP > AMD Duron > Celeron

There is also a Sempron_Duron from AMD and Pentium M from Intel ... but anyway ..

Basically, if you are pointing your game to a mid and high PC, you definitely must test with AMD XP I think ...

Paolo.

- what is the 3D performance?
In most case it depends on the GFX card.

- do you think a PC with an Intel Celeron (2Ghz or more) and a mid video card (128mb) can play video games at a decent FPS?
Most should, as long as it has a not-so-outdated GFX card.

- do you think indie games should be playable in those PCs?
You need to consider that if you want a wide customer group.

While you're making game, beware of frame tweening if you want same execution speed on every PC.

well the celeron is for paupers and box shifters to those who dont know any better.

And elitist twaddle is for developers who yearn to be paupers after spec'ing their games out of the market. Seriously - I had an old 600Mhz Celeron with a Voodoo 45' and it ran rings around the PS2 for Unreal Tourney... I'd love to know what it is, exactly, that indie developers are doing that is more complex and requires more power than Unreal Tournament, I really would.

Your customers are housewives with computers that should be just about able to manage email, browsing and the odd bit of word processing. If your indie game needs a 2Ghz+ behemoth then you've gone horribly, horribly wrong somewhere.

Possibly... although in general AMD athlon will give you more bang for the buck than the Pentium's. The clock speed may be lower, but they have more efficient internals so they get more done in less clock cycles. Intel has some pretty high-end CPU's, but you will definitely pay a premium for it. Personally I don't see myself ever buying an intel again, they're yesterday's news.

(Especially the current dual core CPU's, AMD is spectacularly better than Intel. Faster, cheaper, and less hot)