MaysLanding wrote:
All they do on the Celeron is lower the cache memory aboard the chip to reduce cost. However, as I found out when I put a £30 CPU to the test it doesn't seem to matter how much they cut out because Sandybridge CPUs are win.
Video editing is one of the few arenas in which beefier CPUs really get a chance to shine. For example when I'm putting together my videos in Sony Vegas Movie Studio, which can contain a lot of titles/effects/multiple tracks etc, when I come to render the final video it'll cheerfully load all four physical and all four logical cores to a solid 80% utilisation, and even then it can take 30 minutes or more to finish the render.
Performing the same task on a Celeron, which is giving away physical cores, logical cores, cache, and just about everything else - will certainly take a hell of a lot longer to complete.
More powerful CPUs also help with effects previews, coping with massive media bins (RAM and fast disks help here too), analysing audio tracks etc etc.
Basically, if you're into video editing, the more power you've got the better.