Pentiums?!

[NoEcho]

I was just poking around some laptops and saw something that I've noticed a few times recently - Pentiums for sale. In 2015 Pentiums?!

There must be some magic to this. Some deeper story. How is it possible to have Pentiums - outdated since 1998 or something - showing up again as modern cpus?

 

[leeleatherwood]

They use the same tech as the same generation Core CPU's.

They are basically (further) stripped down i3's. With that being said they are good for entry level laptops and desktops.

The Intel Pentium G3258 processor is based on the new 22nm Haswell Microarchitecture for improved CPU performance. State-of-the-art power management innovations help keep power consumption in check. The virtualization technology enables better productivity and manageability. Advanced Intel integrated graphics enables discrete-level graphics performance. Extract more power from your Haswell core-based processor. Plus, the Pentium G3258 is fully unlocked offering you a budget-friendly choice to enjoy the excitement and thrill of overclocking.

 

[misterbobby]

1998? Have you been living under a rock for 17 years? Pentiums were common ever since the time I got into computers in 2002. Every architecture since then has had Pentium models too.

 

[Trimlock]

Current pentiums use the i3 chip but is heavily neutered, it's the new celeron even though they still make celerons....

 

[Araxie]

pentium have never been vanished from the market.. since those times of P5: Pentium, P6: Pentium Pro, Pentium II, Pentium III, NetBurst: Pentium 4, Pentium D, Pentium M(P6 Based): Pentium M, Pentium Dual Core, Core(allendale, Wolfdale): Pentium Dual Core, Pentium. and then still they always existed through Nehalem, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge and Haswell.. and well even Xeon rebranded Pentiums =D.

 

[CaptNumbNutz]

Current pentiums use the i3 chip but is heavily neutered, it's the new celeron even though they still make celerons....

And the celeron went down a peg too. A few of the Celerons are based on Bay Trail Atoms. There is quite a bit of overlap now, but you basically won't find many of these chips in laptops since they are systems on chips meant for embedded systems.

 

[Araxie]

And the celeron went down a peg too. A few of the Celerons are based on Bay Trail Atoms. There is quite a bit of overlap now, but you basically won't find many of these chips in laptops since they are systems on chips meant for embedded systems.

You can typically find Quad Core Celeron Silvermont based laptops which are actually cheap and very decent..

 

[Quix]

And the celeron went down a peg too. A few of the Celerons are based on Bay Trail Atoms. There is quite a bit of overlap now, but you basically won't find many of these chips in laptops since they are systems on chips meant for embedded systems.

Watch out, because you actually will find them in low-end laptops. Baytrail or Cherrytrail chips are all over the low end now. If it says Celeron it's probably one of these and the new "Pentium" chips are also based on Cherrytrail. I'd avoid them on anything bigger than a tablet.

 

[kirbyrj]

Watch out, because you actually will find them in low-end laptops. Baytrail or Cherrytrail chips are all over the low end now. If it says Celeron it's probably one of these and the new "Pentium" chips are also based on Cherrytrail. I'd avoid them on anything bigger than a tablet.

Have you actually used one? They aren't that bad. You get a 6W quad core part that doesn't need cooling. They work fine for basic computing.

 

[PersonalJ]

It's Intel performance branding, it goes Celeron < Pentium < i3 < i5 < i7

 

[ToddW2]

I rocked a pentium for a few months recently and for every-day desktop work and multitasking it was actually just fine. I was VERY surprised. Then again it was latest architecture, and high frequency so that's really to be expected.

 

[Jeremy C]

I'm using a Pentium G3258 in my youngest's PC for gaming. Took it to 4GHz and left it as is, and it works just fine for his machine. He doesn't play any games that would take advantage of more threads, so the high single thread IPC is perfect for a budget machine.

 

[defaultluser]

For low-end laptops and tiny low-power systems, it's easy to tell the difference between a Silvermont rebranded Celeron/Pentium, and a regular desktop low-power chip WITHOUT resorting to Google.

The Silvermont cores all have Z or N in the model number.

On the desktop, just look for processors with G in the model number. Those are the real desktop processors.

That said, Silvernmont is pretty powerful.

The desktop Pentium chips are fairly capable - they trade blows with a Core i3 in everything except highly multithreaded tasks. Most office use will be fantastic on a machine like that.

 

[Modred189]

I'm using a Pentium G3258 in my youngest's PC for gaming. Took it to 4GHz and left it as is, and it works just fine for his machine. He doesn't play any games that would take advantage of more threads, so the high single thread IPC is perfect for a budget machine.

For low-end laptops and tiny low-power systems, it's easy to tell the difference between a Silvermont rebranded Celeron/Pentium, and a regular desktop low-power chip WITHOUT resorting to Google.

The Silvermont cores all have Z or N in the model number.

On the desktop, just look for processors with G in the model number. Those are the real desktop processors.

That said, Silvernmont is pretty powerful.

The desktop Pentium chips are fairly capable - they trade blows with a Core i3 in everything except highly multithreaded tasks. Most office use will be fantastic on a machine like that.

THese. I have a 3.2ghz Pentium running my home server, and it's plenty fast for what it does, and then some. If all you need is clock speed, and threading isn't an issue for you, they are very capable chips for desktops. I'm NOT a fan of the laptop parts, however, as they tend to leave the clock speed behind.

 

[Millerboy3]

I have a G3240 in a barebones HTPC and a G3258 clock to 4.4ghz in my home server. Both of which run like a dream to do their simple jobs. The G3258 is amazing for its cost/performance ration when overclocked even with stock cooler! Mine however is under water and delidded.

 

[Araxie]

THese. I have a 3.2ghz Pentium running my home server, and it's plenty fast for what it does, and then some. If all you need is clock speed, and threading isn't an issue for you, they are very capable chips for desktops. I'm NOT a fan of the laptop parts, however, as they tend to leave the clock speed behind.

yes same here, I have 2 machines N3540 running 24/7 for Home server and HTPC. great quadcore chips specially for the tiny 7W TDP.

 

[Darksword]

It's all about the Pentiums, baby.

 

[CrimsonKnight13]

It's all about the Pentiums, baby.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpMvS1Q1sos

 

[Tsumi]

It's Intel performance branding, it goes Celeron < Pentium < i3 < i5 < i7

Core M now goes between Pentium and i3. With M's having a lower base clock and having lower TDPs than i3, but still hyperthreaded dual cores like the i3.

 

[CaptNumbNutz]

You can typically find Quad Core Celeron Silvermont based laptops which are actually cheap and very decent..

Watch out, because you actually will find them in low-end laptops. Baytrail or Cherrytrail chips are all over the low end now. If it says Celeron it's probably one of these and the new "Pentium" chips are also based on Cherrytrail. I'd avoid them on anything bigger than a tablet.

I was talking about a specific group of the Celerons. I also said there is quite a bit of overlap between the Atom/Celeron/Pentium lines.

When I said they "went down a peg" I mean they are no longer just neutered Pentiums like in years past. High end pentiums are neutered Core i3's, and I don't think there are any celeron's left that share anything with the higher end core series. low end pentiums overlap with the same basic core types as Celerons and Atoms with varying feature types/cache/#cores etc.

Please keep in mind, I'm not saying the Celerons and Atoms are bad chips. They are really decent for some very niche low power uses, even better than a core series chip could do.

 

[Modred189]

Please keep in mind, I'm not saying the Celerons and Atoms are bad chips. They are really decent for some very niche low power uses, even better than a core series chip could do.

Having been an early Atom adopter (Acer Aspire One), they used to be dog-crap CPUs.
As an owner of a Surface 3, I cannot say enough about them. VERY capable chips in the right use scenario.

 

[Araxie]

Having been an early Atom adopter (Acer Aspire One), they used to be dog-crap CPUs.
As an owner of a Surface 3, I cannot say enough about them. VERY capable chips in the right use scenario.

yup, completely agree things have changed a lot since the first Atom launch.. people shouldn't forget they are low powered chips and the things they can make at just 4W-5WTDP are just great, without forget the 2W TDP parts.

 

[shaggy77]

My wife and I just picked up a quad core Pentium N for my daughter's first real computer/ laptop. Quite frankly, I was pretty freaking impressed with the her computer. The CPU was handling all her programs which any entry level type processor should handle. Given the fact it is a Quad Core running at 6 Watts is really just mind blowing. I can compare apples to apples with an older Atom based net book with SSD and maxed RAM. The newer laptop just feels snapper and overall quicker. Once again I am impressed with low TDP offerings from Intel.

 

[Araxie]

My wife and I just picked up a quad core Pentium N for my daughter's first real computer/ laptop. Quite frankly, I was pretty freaking impressed with the her computer. The CPU was handling all her programs which any entry level type processor should handle. Given the fact it is a Quad Core running at 6 Watts is really just mind blowing. I can compare apples to apples with an older Atom based net book with SSD and maxed RAM. The newer laptop just feels snapper and overall quicker. Once again I am impressed with low TDP offerings from Intel.

Battery life its amazing also which are the main point of a laptop.

 

[PGHammer]

The big change with Pentium (and Celerons as well) came with the Conroe/Wolfdale derivatives - Celeron DC and Pentium DC, respectively. These particular Celerons and Pentiums were hobbled Core 2s (admittedly), but they weren't hobbled in the expected ways. (The E3400 Celeron Dual-Core, for example, included support for VT-x - extremely atypical for ANY Intel CPU that didn't have Core 2 somewhere in the name.) Also, the entirety of this series of Celerons and Pentiums - and especially the Celerons - overclocked like demons; it was my experience with the E3400 that sparked MY comment about Tabasco sauce on Celery.)

The 20th Anniversary Pentium (AKA G3258) is no less than the modern version of these hobbled Core 2s - the difference is only the base of the CPU that got hobbled in creating these modern Baby Beasties is not a Core 2, but a Core i-series, and specifically the Core i3.

Look at the common features between the G3258 and the i3 - in other words, look at what isn't missing.

1. G3258 supports Hyper-V. This feature came directly from the i-series, just as VT-x came from Core 2. Virtualization is a biggie in modern operating systems, and especially Windows, and the default version of virtualization supported in Windows is Hyper-V - not VT-x. Why Intel dropped it down this low - that is quite obvious; AMD already HAS it this far down the pipeline; every Fusion APU supports Hyper-V. (Not some OR most - all.) Worse, AMD's OLDER CPUs (back to Turion) mostly support Hyper-V as well.

2. Integrated graphics. This isn't just an issue in terms of portable computing - it's an issue in small-form-factor, AIOs, and, of course, portable computing (basically, anything with the display as part of the package). Display sizes run the gamut - from inches to feet. G3258 - like Core i3 - includes Intel HD Graphics support (4400 and up, according to Intel nomenclature). That is the full DX 11 API suite on offer - and enough to drive ANNO 2205. (That is from personal experience - not a benchmark.) 1080p on da cheap? Yes, please.

3. Price. Being [H] isn't JUST about the high end - look at what goes into being [H] from the engineering end of things - including building a lower-end PC. There IS still a ton of overlap in terms of capability across the entirety of Intel's CPU family. Building a lower-end PC isn't JUST about what's not there - it's also about what stayed in. (Anyone that has built an HTPC or SFF PC knows that much.)

4. There are progeny. The G3258 was apparently planned to be a limited run - however, not only is it still available, it has begat offspring. The most obvious is (not so ironically, apparently) the G3260. It has zero difference in terms of specification compared to the G3258 - yet it costs $8 less in quantity. (Yes - a retail-boxed version of the G3260 is available.) The question, however, begs *why* - it's not like the G3258 has gone anywhere. The other surprise is that it costs MORE than the G3258 - which is older by eleven months - and is still quite easily available in retail. (I can score a G3258 for less via local-retail than on Amazon - for which I have to wait until Monday to be able to get at all.)

 

[DejaWiz]

The recent Pentiums are pretty stout for typical everyday use. Quad core, ultra low power, and turbo boost. I think my next laptop will be an N3700 or successor.

 

[PGHammer]

The recent Pentiums are pretty stout for typical everyday use. Quad core, ultra low power, and turbo boost. I think my next laptop will be an N3700 or successor.

The Conroe/Wolfdale Celerons and Pentiums were stout for THEIR time as well - which is why I not only recommended them, but used them. (The only reason I went away from E3400 was due to specific requirements that demanded a quad-core - not due to anything necessarily lacking OTHERWISE. In terms of upgrades, I'll be having to see if there is ANY chance for the equivalent of the N in LGA1150 - after all, who would have expected the G3258 to hang on as long as it has?)

 

[Trimlock]

I'm not shocked it stayed, or the fact Intel wants to replenish it. The processor sparked a big interest in low end machines, it helped move people from their older, dead end boards into an 1150 one with the intention to upgrade later. I suspect Intel will do this again with the 1151 socket it they think it will help push their chipset.

 

[bds1904]

I'm not shocked it stayed, or the fact Intel wants to replenish it. The processor sparked a big interest in low end machines, it helped move people from their older, dead end boards into an 1150 one with the intention to upgrade later. I suspect Intel will do this again with the 1151 socket it they think it will help push their chipset.

Exactly. Intel has had a "budget" line for a long, long time now. IMHO it is what keeps intel relevant. 90% of people buy a pc based on price and price alone, incuding businesses. Ultra-high-end processors are cheaper and cheaper now making lower end professors cheaper too. 1997 or so a top of the line desktop processor was $1500, and that was when a gallon of milk was $1.79 and gas was $0.97/gallon. Compare that to chip prices now and its like selling the same p2 300mhz processor for $300 in 1997.

Intel has continued to reduce the manufacturing cost of chips and it opens up what I refer to as the "commody pc market". 2nd pc, kids pc, htpc etc.

Heck, you can get an entire cherry trail z8500 pc with windows 10 for $100 from newegg. It plays 1080p video all day, runs every office app and plays basic (and I mean basic, mind-numbing kids games) 3d games just fine. Perfect for the kids.

My point? Most people don't need high end rigs, and don't notice the difference. People buying low end pc's is what makes our hobby cheaper. Low end processors and server chips are intel's bread and butter.

 

[PGHammer]

I'm not shocked it stayed, or the fact Intel wants to replenish it. The processor sparked a big interest in low end machines, it helped move people from their older, dead end boards into an 1150 one with the intention to upgrade later. I suspect Intel will do this again with the 1151 socket it they think it will help push their chipset.

All too true - remember, it was Celeron DC/Pentium DC that finally killed off S478 (which the Prescott Space Heater and even Pentium D were unable to do).

If you don't need a quad-core (and how much in the way of even games of today actually does), something like G3258 (for either LGA1150 OR LGA1151) may make much more sense than even an i5. Of ALL the games I either have now or are up for consideration between now and March 2016, all of MAYBE one game - Ashes of the Singularity - threatens to absolutely positively demand an i5 - and if it does, it's a straight CPU swap. Period. (And that wouldn't be new, even for me - remember, I'm the [H]-er that swapped out an E3400 for a Q6600, despite being shackled to the CSM stumblebum that was G41; H81 is nowhere near the stumblebum that G41 was in the original iteration (the one I had); after all, H81 supports overclockage, which G41 did not.) As far as Z170A goes, it's not a *bad* chipset - not any more than Z97/87/77 were - and it's not any pricier. The real issue is that Skylake performance is not much of an improvement (in terms of software performance - and I'm speaking in terms of current software) over any Core i-series i5 or i7 back to (surprisingly) Sandy Bridge - let alone either Ivy Bridge or Haswell. (I can't speak of i3 because a Skylake i3 hasn't shipped - and may not ship in retail at all.)

ANNO 2205 does NOT demand a quad-core; however, what it DOES demand is a discrete GPU; Intel HD4400 barely cuts the ketchup for the latest Ubisoft building sim - however, it does actually cut it. (Not something I'm used to saying about on-CPU-die Intel graphics when it comes to games.) H81 can optionally support a discrete GPU (in addition to, or instead of, Intel HD Graphics - tag-teaming on-CPU and discrete paves the way for Intel QuickSync, of course) - naturally, the MSI H81-E33 I chose supports the QuickSync option. (QuickSync or no QuickSync, I tend to see onboard graphics as a fallback position on non-portable hardware - not the default; that is the biggest complaint I have with AIOs - most don't have a discrete-GPU upgrade option.)

 

[YeuEmMaiMai]

edit someone beat me to it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qpMvS1Q1sos

I was around when the original Pentium 60 was released 5V hot and in a lot of cases slower than a i486 DX4 100

 

[DejaWiz]

The Conroe/Wolfdale Celerons and Pentiums were stout for THEIR time as well - which is why I not only recommended them, but used them. (The only reason I went away from E3400 was due to specific requirements that demanded a quad-core - not due to anything necessarily lacking OTHERWISE. In terms of upgrades, I'll be having to see if there is ANY chance for the equivalent of the N in LGA1150 - after all, who would have expected the G3258 to hang on as long as it has?)

Sorry, I should have clarified...I was speaking about the mobile offerings. The desktop Celerons and Pentiums (in the Core processor generations) have always been stout, as you said. My kids computer has a Haswell-based Celeron dual core and it's certainly no slouch.

 

[Krypton]

I have a G3258 (#2 in sig), and will upgrade to Windows 10 sooner or later, but I have a question regarding the original OCing issue when Windows 10 was released.. I read recent updates fixed the OC issues
Per this Reddit post:

"Edit 4 Nov 12, 2015: Windows 10 Build 10586.3 seems to have updated mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll and restored OC capability."

on https://www.reddit.com/r/buildapc/co...currently_not/

it claims to be fixed. Can anyone confirm?
__________________

 

[PGHammer]

Fixed as of update #1, and applies to any chipset that supports overclockage - not just Z97. (My G is coupled to H81 - which also supports overclocking.) Rather amusingly, I haven't seen a need TO overclock yet, strange as it sounds - as basic performance has improved that much.