<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Three new 32nm Celerons in September</title>
		<description>Discuss Three new 32nm Celerons in September</description>
		<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 09:16:27 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://www.fudzilla.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_k2/23027/10" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>crackerz says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24689</link>
			<description><![CDATA[D31337Antics I could buy a single core processor if the dual core is for example has 35w TDP and the single one 10w :P ..else I can't find a reason why do it The dual core let you do so much more without the system slowing down, I imagine myself doing some video encoding, playing a game and having 2-3 websites open(playing some flash videos because I forgot to close them lol), weird case senario but it happens to me.. with a four core as I have its not big deal, with a dual hmmm..working but not flawlessly ..single one? ..what a joke heh(even if it was clocked at 4GHz ..one is still one)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>crackerz</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 08:04:02 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24689</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>D31337Antics says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24666</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have to agree with TechHog about price but crackerz does bring up a good point about TDP. In all seriousness regardless of clock speeds how can a processor with twice as many cores and cache cost only 5$ more? I am probably missing something but it feels like either the dual-core should cost a little more or the single-core should cost a little less. What do you guys think?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>D31337Antics</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jun 2011 20:56:33 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24666</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>crackerz says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24558</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It depends on what you are looking, if the single core and 1.6GHz consumes 30w and the dual core consumes 60w then we can choose on power bases(the TDP is not what a cpu consumes in an normal situation) P.S. Thats the only reason that I can find, feel free to add if something else is in your mind.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>crackerz</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2011 21:37:07 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24558</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24557</link>
			<description><![CDATA[But it's clocked at 1.6GHz! Who in their right mind would buy a 1.6GHz single-core when a 2.4GHz dual-core is only $5 more? Someone at Intel needs to be fired.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2011 19:48:45 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24557</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>crackerz says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24554</link>
			<description><![CDATA[If you are a company with tons of money.. you don't care for 'details' like this ahhaahh]]></description>
			<dc:creator>crackerz</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2011 17:10:18 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24554</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>TechHog says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24537</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So, not only are they selling a single-core CPU, but they're selling a dual core for $5 more. DOES NOT COMPUTE]]></description>
			<dc:creator>TechHog</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jun 2011 00:02:00 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24537</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>crackerz says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24535</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I'm a computer technician you idiot with experiance as your age(>10yr), Oh btw did I mention that I have a BSc at computing? ..sorry for forgeting to write it. Drac..next time you write something try to think it a little bit. P.S. I ALWAYS go best price/performance and AMD rule at that, if the things turn around I will go to intel without thinking. Celeron or ANY cpu with one core is a step backward, I prefer 300Mhz down but Dual core at least rather than one core higher clocked. iicsus I totally agree with you and I add, you can find many features in an amd motherboard as many as in an intel one and you can find a mobo with very few features in both platforms ;-}]]></description>
			<dc:creator>crackerz</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 23:00:40 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24535</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Cartman says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24517</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Hahahahaha why would you buy a single core CPU today, dear God Intel is selling single core CPUs in 2011 , but its funny cuz there are idiots who would buy that ... BTW why is not a surprise to see that Fuad wrote this article LOL]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Cartman</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:50:53 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24517</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>iicsus says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24516</link>
			<description><![CDATA[No, they don't.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>iicsus</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:46:27 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24516</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Drac says:</title>
			<link>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24511</link>
			<description><![CDATA[So why then you leaving stupid "comments" here if you not interested? OH,i know - just another amd fagboy.. To your small knowledge,you can find Intel mobos for same price as amd,the difference is - Intel mobos always have more features.Thats first. Second - amd platform perform way better? I LOL'ed at this BS xD Since when amd platform perform better? You need to check all test just to find out that 6core amd easily loosing to 4core Intel.Yay,thats the "perform way better" i guess.You amd fagboys really amking me laugh :D]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Drac</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:41:06 +0100</pubDate>
			<guid>http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/23027-three-new-32nm-celerons-in-september#comment-24511</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
