sempron 64, celeron D 64 bit,

intel sent celeron D's 64bit last month, they named them 351,345,341,336,331 just to confuse the new naming system even more.

Lord knows what the "d" stands for in celeron D
 
Yeah

One more thing about the Semprons that just came out. They oc extremely well as they are based on the Venice/San Diego cores. They reach speeds of about 2.7Ghz top. Anyway, I am building a budget comp for my friend with the intent to OC. I will post results. Also I would note that the Semprons are a good way of getting 64bit without spilling out quite a lot more. The Sempron I chose has 256KB cache so should do well when pushed to its limits :P .

JAN :D
 
Last edited:
sempron 64, celeron D 64 bit, woah

sempron 64, celeron D 64 bit? Wow, just found out about these two new chips today, anyone have any more information on them?
 
Lord knows what the "d" stands for in celeron D
Click to expand...
Why does it have to stand for anything? :) For all we know it could be an internal revision code thingy that stuck
 
Why does it have to stand for anything? For all we know it could be an internal revision code thingy that stuck
Click to expand...
true, but then it would stand for an internal revision code. lol :D
I guess they just needed some differentiation from the old gen celerons
 
D was an odd choice because it is not (currently) a dual core chip and the Pentium D is, they should have stuck with the straight celeron name. I don't pretend to understand marketing but it must make sense to someone.

Why do you think the numbering system Intel uses is confusing?
 
Why do you think the numbering system Intel uses is confusing?
Click to expand...
that is a damn good question. I agree that branding you cpu based on clock speed alone may not have been the best idea in the world, but i envisage the new system will lead to more confusion still.
 
I think it is very straight forward. XY0 = base model with X representing family and Y the speed bin, XY1 = EM64T added (in the case of non-EM64T natives) and XY5 = 133FSB. IMO that's way less confusing then AMDs system, there are at least 3 different A64 3200+ chips
 
XY5 = 133FSB
Click to expand...
does that hold for celeron D's, which all run 133
and what about XY6 (in the case of 346, and 336) :D

and when you look at the ultra low voltage P-M's you get 333, 353, 373, 383
Stuff like the 538 i also dont get :confused:

But the system seems to hold true for the p4, p D, and p EE
 
Yah sorry I didn't get into that it slipped my mind :o, but basically add 1 to the end column to add EM64T. For celerons 3x5 models have a higher multipler than the 3x0 equivalent.

The 538 (518, 548, etc) are mobile P4s. They are 5x5 (533BUS) + 3 for other laptop oriented features
 
Yah sorry I didn't get into that it slipped my mind , but basically add 1 to the end column to add EM64T. For celerons 3x5 models have a higher multipler than the 3x0 equivalent.

The 538 (518, 548, etc) are mobile P4s. They are 5x5 (533BUS) + 3 for other laptop oriented features
Click to expand...
well its a system i suppose, IMO if that's simple then i must be even simpler ;)


For celerons 3x5 models have a higher multipler than the 3x0 equivalent.
Click to expand...
that one i didn't know
 
it would be less confusing if they didnt have dual cores and 64 bit cpu's, then it would only increase my the type of chip and the speed. What really annoys me is when im looking at a best buy catalog, it only says "Pentium 4 530J" doesnt list the clock speed anywhere, and i havent been able to memorize what the speeds are for the numbers.
 
I think it is very straight forward. XY0 = base model with X representing family and Y the speed bin, XY1 = EM64T added (in the case of non-EM64T natives) and XY5 = 133FSB. IMO that's way less confusing then AMDs system, there are at least 3 different A64 3200+ chips
Click to expand...
Yes indeedy ... 3200s
- ADA3200AEP4AR
- ADA3200AEP4AX
- ADA3200AEP5AP
- ADA3200DAA4BP
- ADA3200DEP4AW
- ADA3200DIK4BI

On the surface it's much easier to understand however Intel procs get SUPER STUPID when you start dealing with OPN codes (i.e., AMD OPNs have a well established and defined pattern, Intel's seem kinda hacked together) ... take a Pentium4 530 for instance ... with a lot of pain and suffering you can derive the OPN to be BX80546PG3000E and that a BTX Pentium4 570 is BX80546PG3800ET (for the record the 570J BTX also has the same OPN and if we rip out the BTX then it becomes BX80546PG3800EJ) ... hehe I think i was complaining to you about the pain, agony and suffering of deriving these back when i had that project ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top