AVS Forum banner
1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm interested in a bit of discussion regarding the older Celeron vs. the newer Core i3.


The parts that would remain consistent despite build are:


HDD - Seagate Barracuda 7200.12 ST3500418AS 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive


Case - Rosewill R363-M-BK Black Ultra High Gloss Finished MicroATX Computer Case with 400W ATX 2.2 12V Power Supply


BlueRay Drive - LITE-ON Black 4X Blu-ray Reader SATA Model


Core i3 specific:


RAM: Kingston ValueRAM 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1333 (PC3 10600) Dual Channel Kit


CPU: Intel Core i3-530 Clarkdale 2.93GHz LGA 1156 73W Dual-Core


Motherboard: ASRock H55M LGA 1156 Intel H55 HDMI Micro ATX

Price: $429


==================


Celeron Specific:


RAM: WINTEC AMPX 2GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400)


CPU: Intel Celeron E3300 Wolfdale 2.5GHz LGA 775 65W Dual-Core Processor


Motherboard: GIGABYTE GA-G41M-ES2L LGA 775 Intel G41 Micro ATX


Video: GIGABYTE GV-N95TOC-1GI GeForce 9500 GT 1GB 128-bit GDDR2 PCI Express 2.0 x16

Price: $385


===================


So, I'm kind of scratching my head here... I haven't seen this debated and I imagine lots of people have crunched the numbers. From a price stand point, I wonder why Intel has these chips around same price point when configured as basic PCs?


$45 isn't much... but I've never built a rig knowing that it relied on the integrated graphics. Are they, the GPU on die, that good?


So what do you have to say? Has Intel killed the Celeron? Did they make a pricing mistake or are they pulling a fast one?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,143 Posts
You're skewing the cost of the Celeron system by including a video card. The integrated GPU in the i3 is pretty much the same as the X4500 in that Gigabyte G41 board. There are a few minor improvements, and it does do 7.1 bitstreaming (if you can get it to work), but it's basically the same GPU. Since the 9500 you included in the Celeron system doesn't bitstream, I'l assume that isn't a requirement for you. That being the case, you will see no appreciable difference between the i3's IGP and the G41's IGP. If you don't feel you need a dedicated GPU for the i3, then you don't need it for the G41 either.


Knock $60 off the 775 system's price for the unnecessary video card, and you've got a total price difference of about $100. Not a ton of money, but nothing to sneeze at either. Whether or not the (substantial) performance increase of the i3 is worth the money is a question only you can answer. Personally, I'd pay the extra Benjamin just to have a system that will be very upgradable (both CPU and RAM) several years from now. The added performance is just a nice bonus.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,132 Posts
G41 (precisely X4500 non-HD) lacks full hardware HD video decode acceleration. Celeron dual-core can handle decoding fine, though.


I would rather add GT 220 or HD 5450 (HD audio bitstreaming) to the Celeron+G41 system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
701 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by candre23 /forum/post/18150893


You're skewing the cost of the Celeron system by including a video card. The integrated GPU in the i3 is pretty much the same as the X4500 in that Gigabyte G41 board. There are a few minor improvements, and it does do 7.1 bitstreaming (if you can get it to work), but it's basically the same GPU. Since the 9500 you included in the Celeron system doesn't bitstream, I'l assume that isn't a requirement for you. That being the case, you will see no appreciable difference between the i3's IGP and the G41's IGP. If you don't feel you need a dedicated GPU for the i3, then you don't need it for the G41 either.


Knock $60 off the 775 system's price for the unnecessary video card, and you've got a total price difference of about $100. Not a ton of money, but nothing to sneeze at either. Whether or not the (substantial) performance increase of the i3 is worth the money is a question only you can answer. Personally, I'd pay the extra Benjamin just to have a system that will be very upgradable (both CPU and RAM) several years from now. The added performance is just a nice bonus.

I disagree across the board, his comparison is much more fair from a performance standpoint than most I've seen on the net.


The integrated graphics on the i3 530 are FAR superior to the G41. They are a derivative product, however IMHO mark the biggest step forward in intel integrated video performance, ever. The core i3 530 is the first Intel integrated video I would(and am) actually consider using for anything beyond internet browsing/e-mail/office applications.


However for functionality to be truely comparable, something like a HD5450 would be more accurate than the listed 9500GT, though any external graphics card is going to be far superior to any integrated video currently out.


Personally, I would say go for the Celeron E3200 and a HD5450 for HD video playback, I would only consider the core i3 if I were looking to specifically get something integrated for as SFF as possible, like mini-ITX in a Antec ISK300.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
I didn't think I was skewing anything. I just built a Core i7 rig on the 1156 platform. While I was planning, I heard a ton of nay-saying; The Core i7 x58 would ALWAYS beat the Core i7 p55, even though they were at the same price point. My Benches with a small OC + Turbo are enough to get that rig noticed by the guys running dual Xeon procs, FWIW.


The reviews are treating the i3 as a magical proc for the HTPC crowd. I haven't seen one slam the IG yet. I don't have much experience building systems for the HTPC market, but I've built plenty for 3D modelers and animators. My point is, I found that building a system expressly denying a discrete vid card a bit odd, but exciting for the application... as in, no one is playing Crysis maxed out here AFAIK.


I happen to think Intel didn't think this one through. The PC builders certainly crunch the numbers and have seen what I've seen. The Core i3 is a much easier sell for someone who is concerned about integration, cost, energy, and SFF.


Take the case away, add an SSD, pico power, put the Core i3 on an mini-ITX board and zip tie, velcro or glue the darn thing to the back of your TV.... WOW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
701 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by ttownfire /forum/post/18156186


Take the case away, add an SSD, pico power, put the Core i3 on an mini-ITX board and zip tie, velcro or glue the darn thing to the back of your TV.... WOW.

That might be a bit much, especially with cases like the Antec ISK300 around that are extremely quiet, or a case like the M350, that's completely passive, though I don't know that I'd trust a core i3 without a fan at all, 73W is nothing to sneeze at.


Personally, I get cases that are WAY to big, and are generally just desktop cases, because there's a lot more room to run big, slow fans and giant passive heatsinks, then just stuff the whole thing out of site and it doesn't matter that it's not pretty, cause even at full blast you'd never know it was there if the door wasn't open.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
16,132 Posts
Right now Clarkdale suffers from a *serious* issue of stuttering at 24Hz (check the Core i3/i5/i7 thread). How serious it is depends on each user, of course.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top