Obviously it wouldn't end up being cost-effective but I wonder what delidding (or for gpu's, replacing the thermal paste) could do to the performance of these older products. Likely not anything significant and it obviously wouldn't be worth the effort but it's an interesting idea nonetheless.
Conroe-era Celerons are widely known for their overclocking capabilities, as their "smaller" architecture compared to their dual core counterparts made them run cooler under the same clock speed. This caused lots of overclocking challenges using the Celeron 420 and 450 as CPUs, as these challenges focus on clock speed rather than performance.
"Core 2" was the successor to the "Core" architecture. It does not relate to the core count. That was the moniker added afterward, i.e. "Duo" or "Quad".
@@TheRealEtaoinShrdlu...It's a joke, dude. Most folks in this comment section probably already KNOW that, so get your "UMMM, ackshually ☝🏻🤓" shit outta here.
But in 2008 when it came out it was pretty much a cheap garbage CPU when it was brand new. Upgraded a lot of PCs that had these- practically ANY core 2, pentium, xeon, even other Celerons were better
Quick note: I worked on online sales for an electronics provider back in '08. We sold many PC options preassembled by our team, yet the cheapest, slowest turd we ever fit one with was the Celeron 420. Targeted to emerging markets, it was about a Celeron 450 but clocked to 1.6GHz, making it even worse. The backlash was quite heavy, with people noticing that they had thrown over 250 bucks on a desktop that struggled with anything more than Windows XP and a couple tasks at the same time.
I had an old Packard bell back in ,2000 ISH it come from curry i think £1000 with millennium. I put xp on it and it nearly died it just couldn't take it then we got broadband and it really wasn't happy. I can't find the model number but it had 64mb ram and I believe a 468mhz CPU. It was terrible before it came out of the box.
It boggles my mind how you can hamper any c2 chip bad enough to perform so poorly. Then again I have always dodged celerons like bullets, even the old classic highly overclock able ones as anyone I ever used always felt laggy like bad input latency.
@@D3M3NT3Dstrang3r that’s CPU manufacturers making profit from every chip possible. Even when design is the same and they’re produced in big wafers, producing chips with the complexity and circuit density needed is a quite complex and risky task, and you often end up with some sub par chips, which mostly crash under heavy workloads or CPU-intensive gaming scenarios, but they can be quite stable at lower speeds. This is being done before the pre-Pentium era and allows to make use of otherwise faulty chips.
@@TechforMusicAI Yes I am aware of binning and what it is and does, the fact that they would even sell a chip that is apparently so faulty that it performs this way is sad, at that point it is basically defective trash. How many features and function of a c2d have to be broken for it to perform so poorly, it is obviously more than just one broken core and some cache.
I have a few old Celeron D 352's, 347's and such because they were such a monster to overclock and held records for many-a-years until the 13th/14th gen came around. It held the top spots for nearly 10 years with FX mixing in between them and then another almost 10 years when the 13/14th gen started appearing, which blew past both in frequency. They were quite the chips back in the day even with only 1 core.
economics is so weird. Think of all the insane processing that bit of silicon sand went through to eventually become worth less than a fruit picked from a tree
I was thinking the same thing. The amount of precision engineering that is required to make something like this, not to mention the labour put into extracting the raw materials needed and it's virtually being given away. What a strange world we live in.
Well I mean it's about usefulness it's something that can't run much from the last decade and is pegged out from stuff from 20 years ago a car isn't valuable as a car if the motors blown, transmissions bad, and have 2 tires to someone who needs a car and with silicone chips their is no getting under the hood to increase performance so no matter how much engineering and care some designers engineers and factory workers used to assemble that car to someone who needs a functional vehicle that's worth scrap price
"Who would buy a 1 cent LGA 775 processor at CEX?" Me. I would. And you bet your RAM sticks imma overclock experiment and have fun with this thing so much until it either breaks or i make a decent computer to donate 😂
@@lordofhyphens it certainly would make things that are already usable even more usable, especially on something like Linux, plus, hey, these things are 1 cent, if you get 100 of them surely you can find some amazing silicon lottery winner among them
I think the real novelty was using a hand-me-down desktop with a Celeron-D in 2010 and actually wishing I could achieve this level of quality out of my CPU.
Hell, I've seen LGA775 Motherboards with NVME support. (Although my understanding is they don't supporting booting, unfortunately) It's likely just nostalgia because I rocked the platform for over a decade and still keep it as my HTPC, but it's probably my favorite PC platform still.
And SATA III 6Gb/s, 3-way SLI, if you bought a high-end motherboard at the end of LGA775 lifecycle, literally the only thing you would complain about after few years is the socket itself. LGA1156 was out at the time that these motherboards were available and it had 4 cores 8 threaded i7 and Xeons which are still holding up pretty well in games (other than lack of AVX) so most of these motherboards were only for enthusiast as they weren't really budget options.
LGA775 is still kind of alive in the industrial scene as a replacement for truly end of life 80s and 90s hardware used to drive machinery, unless you need a few less supported things like ISA DMA or -5 volts without mods. These motherboards are strange to look at as they'll have old stuff like connectivity for floppy, VGA, ISA, IDE, and Compact Flash, new(er) stuff like DDR3, PCIe, and SATA 2, yet be missing stuff in the middle like EISA and 64-bit PCI.
The LGA 775 era was awesome. Pentium Dual Cores,Celerons,Core 2 Duo and Quad ran very cool on stock coolers and they overclocked very well. I had a E2140 OC up to 2.8ghz with stock voltage and stock cooler. CPU was a beast
Only different between those and the 460 is the clock speed. You can quite comfortable overclock a 420 up to 3 GHz and it will just hold it with an appropriate cooler.
No one is probably going to read this or care, but the BSOD was probably because of the overclock. 0x124 is WHEA_Unocorrectable_Error which is a hardware issue with the CPU or a PCIe device. The first parameters being 0x0 tells us that it's the CPU. The fourth parameter can be decoded using Intel's programming manual to see that the error was an Internal Timer error with the CPU.
One of my classmates had a Celeron 420, 4GB of RAM and a fully-bloated installation of Windows 10 back in High School days. Imagine the pain and suffering she had to take to do any task on that thing...
i like your rant about companies and anti consumer i still use windows 7 in modern day and seeing games slowly drop support only because of launchers / stupid stuff is really annoying
I always like to use the analogy to people that a car bought in 2000 can still be perfectly fine for use now 24 years later if it was looked after, but computers and software is not the same. The stuff evolves too quickly still, so you can't get the same kinda life spans out of the equipment. Like it or not, Win 7 is 15 years old now and most essential software will not run on the platform anymore. It's the painful price we pay
@craigmurray4746 yeah people complain that their out of box Anthon 64 system won't run windows 10 seemingly to forget that if you want to run modern stuff you have to run a modern system of these are people who think that at the base of our entire system that theirs some reel to reel holding the entire system together
@@bluespidergaming7719 _Athlon 64 system won't run windows 10_ This is news to me. I ran 1607 or 1703 on an Athlon 64 X2, and I see no reason why it wouldn't run on the single-core variant (though dead slow). Said machine had a SATA SSD however, making it surprisingly usable.
These processors were GIGANTIC upgrades compared to pretty much any single core NetBurst CPU back in the day. Much much faster than Celeron Ds, and similar performance of P4s while being extremely cool. Especially the 420 and 430 were good overclockers as well. I've reached 3.00 GHz on the 420 (1.60 GHz stock) with JUST the stock cooler. That's how efficient these chips were. Of course, being a Celeron AND a single core, you pretty much only bought these CPUs if you were broke. Certainly my case back in the day. If you wanted to surpass P4 levels of performance or even Pentium D, Pentium Dual-Core or a low-end Core 2 Duo were the way to go if you were on limited budget.
@@fungo6631 Merom was really the best thing to ever happen to Intel in the 2000s. Your current desktop architecture is a dead end, and on mobile they were doing SO BAD you ended up selling the last generation (Pentium III-M) along with them for quite a while. So, what do you do? You grab your last gen architecture (P6), modernize THE HELL OUTTA IT (Pentium M), turn it into a dual core (Core Duo), bring it to 64-bit (Core 2 Duo), and end up with such a good product you switch your entire desktop product line with it (Conroe). Keep in mind that this took quite a while to accomplish. I've seen reports of the Merom project actually starting all the way back to 2001 (one year after NetBurst's release - almost as if some engineers at Intel knew P4 wasn't gonna do great), and it was a plan divided in the multiple parts I mentioned. Great job, guys.
@@mikavsn Basically P4 has a pipeline that stalls, while Celeron D has a pipeline that stalls AND a cache that stalls. The Celeron 400 Series all have a cache that stalls. But a much more efficient 14-staged pipeline.
"Core 2" was the architecture. "Duo" was the name of the dual core processors and "Quad" of the quad core. So this could possible have been called a "Solo", but it isn't. It is a Core 2 Celeron.
I think if you add the word based in there, it makes it clearer as in Core 2 based Celeron, or Skylake based Pentium. Intel moving to a generation based system helped vs the numerical Core 2 system.
To add to the confusion, Conroe had 4 names of desktop processors. There was not a 4-core. Core 2 Duo (3 FSB options and 2 cache among the SKUs) Core 2 Extreme (only one part) Pentium (Single core, 800MHz FSB, 1mb cache) Celeron (single core, 800MHz FSB, 512K cache)
This cpu with an radeon x600 or x700 would be great for windows 98, add the Dosbox emulator with it and then you got decent retro rig. Windows XP Service pack 2 is also a good contender with more support of better graphics cards and games.
0:06 Wait, how exactly do you access their website? I live in Belgium, we don't have any CEX's, but the Netherlands do. And for years now I haven't been able to access their website (and everyone I asked about it says they can't properly access either). And when I heard you say that I went to check the UK website and exactly the same thing happens there. Please, teach me the secret to getting to this website! 🥺
I live in Hungary, but I can access their website with UK vpn. The only problem is, that they are not shipping outside of the UK. Only british postcodes avaliable
The fact that most of the games you benchmarked would've been very playable on 480p is kind of insane. For someone who doesn't have any other option, that wouldn't be half bad. Great work on this video man!
That's the problem. "Doesn't have any other option". I doubt that scenario actually sticks in the real world. You either have something that's at least better than this option, or you have no access to any computer (or even electricity) at all. I mean this chip is getting rare because anyone that used it, doesn't anymore.
I have a single core 1.2ghz amd processor with 2 gb of 1066mhz ram and igpu. I'm running tiny 10 on it and the os runs okay. Games don't, although I got halflife to work. It's probably a newer architecture though.
I'm going to assume it was inventory that wasn't supposed to still be for sale, but marked down to a penny as a way to flag it as needing to be removed from the sales floor.
If I can remember my windows 7 bsod stop codes correctly and it has been well over a decade since I last ran into these codes, 0x124 is usually memory controller or RAM voltage related, most often seen in conjunction with overclocking, but not always, usually when it's overclocking related you'll see 0x101 first if the core voltage is too low, and as you stabilise the core you'll get 0x124 instead. Because you have ddr3 in that system it's probably running at either 800MT/s or 1066MT/s, and if you're really lucky it might be 1333MT/s, but that is a very high end motherboard that can reach those speeds and in any case it's pushing the memory controller beyond what it can reasonably do at the current settings.
Everyone's probably sick of seeing comments like this, but for "no man's land" PCs like this that fit neither into modern nor retro, low overhead Linux distros really are your best option in terms of having software that is both usable and modern as opposed to being mutually exclusive. This Celeron even supports x86-64, which makes things a lot easier as finding up-to-date 32-bit only distributions is becoming increasingly difficult. Admittedly using Linux puts a sizable dent into the gaming aspect. There is Proton, but I have no idea how that is handled with a machine of this age. Probably not all that well given how "a little" overhead on a modern computer means something completely different on something like a single core Celeron.
My celly 440 (may have been 430.. I can't remember) ran xbmc on Linux (when it first made the jump from Xbox to PC) like a champ. It had a motherboard with an on-board Nvidia 9400 which did all the heavy lifting of video decoding meaning even this turd of a CPU could just get on with handling menus and stuff
Worst case scenario, also keep Lutris around with your Linux as soon as you install the distro, cause often it has community made configuration scripts that automatically get applied when installing the games, ESPECIALLY with GOG ones, since I noticed Budget here uses those versions when possible (like with Crysis). Makes a guy who casually has Linux on his previous desktop (me) not have to scratch his head troubleshooting.
Sitting here watching this on a Core2 Quad Q9650 OC'd to 3.7 ghz with a 1050 TI, and at 1080P & no issues frame skipping.10GB DDR3 too. 775 is definitely a legendary socket. They still do relatively good for daily driver tasks.
That's a Yorkfield part that came out a year later. I suspect the 12MB (24x of the Celeron featured here) of L2 cache helps a lot with keeping your system relevant. The minor miracle of PCs is that yes, a mid to high end rig from 2008 is still quite usable 14 years later so long as your expectations are appropriate.
Those were actually planned to be one of the *Core 2 Solo* series, as they were Core 2 Solo CPUs with only 512 KB of L2 cache (inbetween, the Pentium Dual-Core CPUs had 1MB of L2 cache, while Core 2 had 2 or 4 MB of L2 cache). But Intel decided to put them in the *Celeron* part of the whole Conroe lineup. They were unofficially called « _Milleville_ ».
Imagine my shock when you said that the CPU didint have a fighting chance with Crysis, I personally thought it looked pretty decent. Man the trauma that growing up with an I3 2100 and a GT 420 gives you, really changes your view on things
The launcher issue, worth mentioning, also works (or doesn’t work) in the other direction. I had some games that they couldn’t be bothered to actually adjust a bit to actually work properly on windows 10. I think I remember GTA3 (the real one, not the trilogy ver.) literally required a fan patch to even launch on windows 10. And some games don’t run properly without forced FPS settings in Nvidia Settings… all because some of those older games weren’t designed for folks who run a screen faster than 60hz (my laptop has a 120hz display), something I can kinda get around if I plug in an external monitor it turns out.
Had a Celeron once. Dropped $45 on a Core 2 Duo and the system ran way faster. The Celeron would crash running Minecraft on the lowest possible settings. The Core 2 Duo could run Minecraft on mediumish with no crashes.
@@joefish6091 I mean the later generations of VIA CPUs were targeted for specific use cases. And you have to consider that they were competing with single-core CPUs that were clocked a lot higher, but which were majorly power hungry and generated a lot of heat.
I've built a bunch of POS systems and some touchscreen DMX lighting controllers for nightclubs back in the day with these (E420-E440) and the dualcore variants (E1200/E1400). They were cheap (compared to "real"/full-fat Core 2 CPUs), did the job more than adequately with XP embedded (or a stripped down version of regular XP Pro) and most importantly, you could easily cool these passively, which in case of those use case examples means one less mechanical part to potentially fail causing downtime. This was especially true in the nightclub environment situation, because back then smoking wasn't banned yet (= tar residue clogging up regular coolers) and things like artificial fog from smoke machines is HELL on anything with forced airflow, similar to chainsmoking
I have an AsRock bundle motherboard, with selected CPU. Motherboard doesn't tell you what it is, just that it's clocked at 2G. Under the heatsink, it's a celeron 420. Just factory overclocked upto the 2G from 1.6. It's also running a version of i945, but claiming it's supports 1333 FSB. Old school AsRock.
13:24 This 0x00000124 STOP code is likely related to the overclock. Specifically, Vcc/core is too low at the moment of the crash (vdroop). I wasn't paying close attention to the setup portion, but increasing load-line calibration might help if that's available. I have completely forgotten what kind of voltage options there are on mid-2000s equipment so I could be talking nonsense right now.
This would be unironically great as the heart of a ultimate Windows 98 SE PC. As I understand it Core 2 is essentially an improved Pentium III, and with only one core you have all Windows 98 can use. There's lots of Socket 775 Intel 865G boards out there, just make sure to get one with AGP...
The low framerates are probably because even Windows 7 is too much for it. It may have the relatively modern Core 2 ALUs and high clock speeds without sacrificing IPC, etc but the amount of cache and being single core is something you'd more typically see in an XP-era PC, I'd wager it'd go pretty well running XP and no games newer than around 2006 or so.
i bought an i7 870 for 20€ and a gtx 1060 and it's an quite ok pc handling forza horizon with max graphics running at over 60fps i i only knew about the rx580
Honestly, the performance being this good makes a lot of sense - at single core level, CPU performance improvements have slowed down dramatically compared to the 80s through the early 2000s. Most of the recent improvements in the last 15-20 years have been additional cores, larger caches, efficiency improvements and the like. You can get a 12 year old Intel Xeon that has raw benchmarks on par with a first gen Ryzen for around 20 quid. The efficiency is terrible though, 3-4x more power compared to the modern equivalent.
As an American, I can say that I wish we had anything like CEX here. I have something close, called Re-PC, but CEX seems a bit better for some things. At least from an outside perspective.
I was so annoyed when Gta V stopped working on windows 7. It's so unfair companies go out of their way to stop people from using it. What harm is it to them? I can understand the need to update things, I understand that security is an issue, but why don't they just stop windows 7 users from accessing the online part? Why do they brick the game so it doesn't work at all?! The game came out when windows 10 didn't even exist!
Celeron 450 is a Conroe-L architecture. They are chip harvests from Core2 Duo Allendale with one faulty core disabled. And half the faulty L2 cache disabled.
"Core 2" is the successor to the "Core" design. What you are doing is confusing the name. Like expecting a Zen 2 CPU to have two cores because there is a 2 in the architecture name.
The Intel Celeron 450 is a really unique Intel CPU released for a really niche use case; such as building a Custom SFF Linux based Hobbyist Computer for Home Automation purposes.
I really don't want to be 'that guy' but it would be interesting seeing this run Linux Mint xfce with Steam and proton... is there still a little more cpu power left in there... while Linux isn't the panacea for everything, it is lighter and that's what we're trying to do here, plus it's more secure than Win7, as good as that was.
I have one of those!... As a keychain. It was, uh, probably working before I drilled a hole through it? I didn't check, but I think it's way more useful as a keychain than it could ever be in a PC. I didn't specifically buy it either, but some guy I bought a motherboard from years ago threw it in as a socket protector (which, to be fair, it is also good at) :D
9:10 Absolutely my opinion Windows 7 is just legendary Tried to develop a website NodeJS would never install not even with extended kernel not even older versions If it still was supported by software i would also still be using it.
Thank you so much for covering this little CPU! I've got almost the entire family (the 420, two 430s, and the 450) but haven't had the time to test them out like you did here. I saw a video on PhlisComputerLab's channel where he did a 100% overclock on the (blazing fast) 420, and I believe you also commented on that video. I would love to see you get your hands on a 420 yourself! Edit: Apparently there is a "mythical" CPU in this family, the Celeron 460. If it DOES exist, you'd probably become a legend if you somehow obtained it
I found a Conroe-L celeron 440 once... I wanted it for a low power system and was able to underclock and undervolt such that i was able to run it fanless... It then lived in my XBMC box until it was replaced with a raspberry pi
For a whole 10 UK pence, there are a host of options. LGA775... Duo E8400 LGA1156... i5-750 LGA1155... i3-3220 /i5-2400S LGA1150... i3-4160 PS. That is picking probably the best choice for each... looks like the i5-2400S does take the win even with the S disadvantage
"...horrible stock cooler", here's how it actually works. When you are 18, your family gets you a PC, you learn about it and you understand that's not enough. When you are 22, first good salaries, first money, you learn and invest in better hardware in your gaming PC but you know it's not enough. When you are 25, you have a decent amount of money and knowledge, you invest in Arctic Freeze 40x cooler and best processor and great CPU and OC ram and OC everything. When you are 27 you discover, that you do not care for case and rgb and want a silence, so you move to water cooling. When you are 30, you discover that computers age faster than you imagined and there is not much point in upgrading system to the ridiculous level because your bleeding edge system will be obliterated by new socket and cpu and chipset, so it was all in vane. At 35 you install your stock cooler on your stock machine and be fine with it, because computers are disposables and there is no point of stretching p*nis.
gigabyte ga-8i865gme-775-rh rev1. Can you give me the best cpu that works with this motherboard? I make some searches and i found that the best i can go is pentium 4 641 but after i saw ... What i saw in this video well not to great. I know that d is dizaster woth an z but idk what's the best i can go with? Currently i have an cpu that has 2.66 or 2.67ghz honestly it's 💀. I need something better not to play gta6 i need it to work on RU-vid on Google and well that's it. I will make windows 10 lose all those apps that it doesn't need so hopefully it can run 720p at least.
Curious to see how something like this would run using Linux. Perhaps the overhead of Proton would make gaming performance worse? I'm sure general desktop performance would be a lot better though.
You should have benchmarks for roblox! It runs like a bitch in some games at high graphics settings. You will be surprised how much a single graphical increase can drop ur frames MASSIVELY. I'm surpirsed how it can run on phones when the best you can get on pc is 2 graphical settings away from top graphics. (I have hd 530 mind you so its gonna be trash.)
I thought Intel made a Core 2 Solo, one that wasn't branded as a Celeron. I also thought they kept the Pentium brand on single-core, but 2 threads, CPUs. That whole era of Intel is kind of a mess for me, since I went with AMD for my gaming PC, then didn't touch it for years.
The original price was $53, which is strange as the dual core Celeron E1500 came out at the same time and cost the same. By the way I looked at the list of Celerons of that time, they made a workstation Celeron Conroe-CL, a single model, the Celeron 445 on the socket 771 socket. That is very odd.
I got a thinkpad with a p8600, 4 gigs ram and an ssd when I cleaned out a storage box. It has elementary linux on it and works ok. I followed the instructions for updating ubuntu and that worked too. Don't know if I can install steam on it though and of course no graphics card so probably pointless. Fine for youtube though.
That CPU would make for an excellent 98 / dos box 😀 Also bet Windows 2k would be a dream on it for doing more productivity stuff. As for the steam games, there is always a torrent for that ;😉🤣
I must say that stock cooler js the first thing i hated in my life of IT world 😅 . All 4 plastic shot broke so i improvised something so yes it works so yes. Boud if it works it works 😅 so don't judge my improvised mode on. Ps i need some pasta not 🍝 this one the thermo one 😅 it gets to 60°C ngl for an old cpu to get there in bios is not gucci.
Celerons are just bad in general. Good overclockers, but the cache is cut down so much that they're basically unusable. It's probably why you're seeing bad performance on games that were 4 yrs old when it was released.
can you try running linux on these processors? like the linux such as Manjaro Linux that's designed for old processors to run again just to test the performance when using daily apps like RU-vid and browsing the web.
Might be interesting to try it on some even older or lighter OSes. Could be really good for a Windows 98 or Windows XP build. Also, it'd be interesting to see how it does with a real lightweight linux build.
If absolutely all you can afford is a 1 cent or 1 pence processor, you're still better off taking some time to save up a few more pennies instead of trying to get this thing to work
Instead of stalling like a netburst, I think it's taking too much time going to DRAM since it has no L3 cache (why would the customers need em am I right?), so yeah, it's still stalling just in a different sorta weird way
The lack of cache is - i'm guessing - the reason for the inconsistent performance. In non-cache bound applications, you have a high clocked core 2 processor, albeit with only one core. But in applications that rely on cache/memory performance, you are going to be seriously hobbled by constant trips out to memory. Even if that memory is DDR3 it is very slow indeed compared to cache on the chip, and remember, this architecture has no integrated memory controller - so it has to go through the chipset if you need to trip out to RAM.
