i9-14900 vs Celeron B710

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron B710
2011
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.07
Core i9-14900
2024
24 cores / 32 threads, 65 Watt
30.36
+43271%

Core i9-14900 outperforms Celeron B710 by a whopping 43271% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3405137
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data50.45
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency0.1944.20
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Raptor Lake-R (2023−2024)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)8 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70$549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 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 cores1 (Single-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Performance-coresno data8
Efficient-coresno data16
Threads132
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz5.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/s219 MHz
Multiplier16no data
L1 cache64K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache256K (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache1.5 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size131 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Number of transistors504 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketPGA988,PPGA988FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
FMA+-
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX-+
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP-+
Demand Based Switching-no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 are enumerated here.

VT-d-+
VT-x++
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size16 GB192 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/s89.6 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel ProcessorsIntel UHD Graphics 770
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency1 GHz1.65 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported24
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900.

PCIe version2.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes1616

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron B710 0.07
i9-14900 30.36
+43271%

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 B710 106
i9-14900 48222
+45392%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron B710 2051
i9-14900 12284
+499%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron B710 868
i9-14900 18728
+2058%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron B710 88.4
i9-14900 2.41
+3568%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron B710 1
i9-14900 57
+9031%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron B710 0.1
i9-14900 18.5
+30733%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron B710 631
i9-14900 12359
+1859%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Celeron B710 4
i9-14900 222
+6189%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Celeron B710 20
i9-14900 359
+1668%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.07 30.36
Integrated graphics card 0.77 6.16
Recency 19 June 2011 8 January 2024
Physical cores 1 24
Threads 1 32
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron B710 has 85.7% lower power consumption.

i9-14900, on the other hand, has a 43271.4% higher aggregate performance score, 700% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 12 years, and 2300% more physical cores and 3100% more threads.

The Core i9-14900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B710 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron B710 is a notebook processor while Core i9-14900 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron B710 and Core i9-14900, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 B710
Celeron B710
Intel Core i9-14900
Core i9-14900

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

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


2.8 101 vote

Rate Celeron B710 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 93 votes

Rate Core i9-14900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron B710 or Core i9-14900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.