Why does it still exist?

let me guess, you NEED more?

planned e-waste

That uses a phone-level Atom, not a Celeron.

Celerons are just relabeled atoms these days, and Atom phone socs havent been made for a few years. That's a tablet and embedded soc.

because AMD has nothing in that range

Low end Core-i are branded Pentium Gold or Celeron
Newer Atom are branded Pentium Silver or Celeron

the latest Atom (n5100/n6000) does actually quite decent 4c4t performance at 5w

>producing a lasting meaningful product like amd
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puma_(microarchitecture)

Because you don't need more.

some Atoms are still being labeled as such
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tremont_(microarchitecture)#Embedded_processors_(Elkhart_Lake)

I got a cheap ass mini pc with a Celeron J4125 and it's perfect for office work, literally don't need more than this

There are millions of PCs sold that don't need more, eg Word/Excel boxes, POS terminals, etc.

Intel literally just made a Celeron with the same cores as their newest flagship i9.

any low end amd cpu blows this out the water.

There haven't been any Pentium or Celeron based on last 3 mainstream Intel cores. They are all Atoms now.
ADL will have some in the future, but based on cuck Atom cores, and not the P-cores.

Actually , throwing creates less waste here as keeping adds packaging, transportation and distribution emissions for a chip which will not be relevant in 2 years and as result will be thrown in can anyways.

>buy super cheap celeron / 4gb memory laptop
>put gentoo on it
>great battery life portable office machine
>3 watt consumption when using libreoffice
pretty based if you ask me

Attached: fgcei.jpg (604x516, 30.81K)

>Intel literally just made a Celeron with the same cores as their newest flagship i9.
It only has the cuck cores of the i9, which are Atoms.

>ADL will have some in the future, but based on cuck Atom cores, and not the P-cores.
bullshit
ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/96163/intel-celeron-processor-g6900-4m-cache-3-40-ghz.html

>chip which will not be relevant in 2 years
I work in a law firm and people are still using 15 year old Core 2 desktops. You have no idea how low people's standards are

Funnily enough, the power efficient cores are the P-cores. E-cores aren't power efficient, they're area efficient.

No, everything below i5-12600K only has performance cores, Celeron included.

imagine missing all CPU-related news for the last two months and still being confident to post

Attached: nigger.png (345x402, 130.09K)

I'll one up it.
I stand corrected.

ironically G6900 probably would've been a better CPU overall if it had 4 cuck cores instead of 2 big cores

although AMD really needs to step their low-end game up so Intel is forced to at least add HT to Celeron and bump the Pentium to 4 cores