If I compared a 2.1ghz Celeron to a 2.1ghz Pentium what would be the difference? As much technical info as possible would be great.
closed as too localized by studiohack♦ Jun 17 '11 at 14:38
This question is unlikely to help any future visitors; it is only relevant to a small geographic area, a specific moment in time, or an extraordinarily narrow situation that is not generally applicable to the worldwide audience of the internet. For help making this question more broadly applicable, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.
Basically, The Pentium line is the mainstream performance chip, and it has many optimised routines built in that make certain tasks perform fast.
For a Celeron, they heavily cut costs and generally have less on board memory, and the result is a much cheaper chip that performs reasonably well (and generally at less power), but not as good as an equal ghz/mhz Pentium / Core 2 of the same generation.
You can't really compare different generation chips because after the Pentium 4 era, the mhz/ghz no longer really count as a comparison because there are so many other factors that determine speed (front side bus, on board memory, instruction sets e.t.c.)
the Celerons are 'budget' processors. they often have less cache memory, or have advanced features purposely disabled.
as a rule of thumb, an equally clocked Pentium will outperform a Celeron.
but an exact comparison is not possible unless you post the exact processor model.
for a long time Pentium CPUs constituted Intel's premium processor brand but that has changed, they were sold as medium range for a while (with the Core 2 Duo as high end range) and now the Pentiums will replace the Celerons as the budget brand while the Core i5 will become the medium range and the Core i7 is the top of the range.