i7-14700F vs Celeron 900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 900
2009
35 Watt
0.26
Core i7-14700F
2024
20 cores / 28 threads, 65 Watt
26.38
+10046%

Core i7-14700F outperforms Celeron 900 by a whopping 10046% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3207197
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data64.51
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.7138.63
Architecture codenameno dataRaptor Lake-R (2023−2024)
Release date1 January 2009 (16 years ago)8 January 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$359

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical coresno data20 (Icosa-Core)
Performance-coresno data8
Efficient-coresno data12
Threadsno data28
Base clock speed2.2 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speedno data5.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data80 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data2 MB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache33 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configurationno data1
SocketPGA478FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x-+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data192 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data89.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F.

PCIe versionno data5.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating.

Celeron 900 0.26
i7-14700F 26.38
+10046%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron 900 412
i7-14700F 42256
+10156%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron 900 217
i7-14700F 2717
+1152%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron 900 233
i7-14700F 16724
+7078%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 26.38
Recency 1 January 2009 8 January 2024
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron 900 has 85.7% lower power consumption.

i7-14700F, on the other hand, has a 10046.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 15 years.

The Core i7-14700F is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 900 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 900 is a notebook processor while Core i7-14700F is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron 900
Celeron 900
Intel Core i7-14700F
Core i7-14700F

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.4 65 votes

Rate Celeron 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 388 votes

Rate Core i7-14700F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Celeron 900 and Core i7-14700F, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.