What is so bad about Intel Celeron?

Answer 1

Significantly lower bus speed & lower onboard cache than Intel's Pentium based processors. Often lower addressable RAM as well.

This is fine for a business PC that runs Office apps & not much more, however, on a home PC where multimedia & multitasking & games are more important it becomes very clear that the Celeron is low man on the totem pole.

It really depends on your needs.

regards,
Philip T

Answer 2

I think the Celeron's are very good processors. They perform very well for those on a budget or those who don't need a whole lot of power. They even can perform very well for demanding applications, provided you have a lot of memory, a great video card, and a decent hard disk.

I think though the AMD Semprons, AMD's equivalent to Intel's Celeron, give users more bang for the buck. It is a great processor for those on a budget. They perform a little better than the celeron processors do. So if I was to choose a budget processor, I would go with the sempron.

Answer 3

Matt gave you a great answer the only thing I will add is that in a lot of cases the price difference for a Pentium or AMD processor is so small why bother with a Celeron.

Answer 4

They use less cache memory on the chip, this means that they do not perform as well as pentium cpu or a athlon cpu. But they are not a bad cpu, if you only use your computer for office work and the internet you wouldnt notice any difference between a Celeron and a high performance cpu . . .

Answer 5

There is nothing wrong with them. They just aren't as capable as a Pentium or an AMD Athlon processor.

Answer 6

low cache memory than Pentium

Answer 7

there a low level chip , normally found in a starter level pc

Answer 8

first its really really really slow
dats all