Core i9-14900K vs Celeron N2807

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot rated65
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data62.42
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Raptor Lake-R
Release date23 February 2014 (10 years ago)17 October 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$589
Current price$251 (2.3x MSRP)$694 (1.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K 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 cores2 (Dual-core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads232
Base clock speed1.58 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.16 GHz5.8 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography22 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1170FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)4.3 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K. 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-+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSXno data+
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data+
Smart Connect+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
StatusLaunchedLaunched
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB++
Secure Key++
Identity Protection-no data
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory size4 GB192 GB
Max memory channels12
Maximum memory bandwidthno data89.6 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 SeriesIntel UHD Graphics 770
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video HD-+
Graphics max frequency750 MHz1.65 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported24

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K 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 N2807 and Core i9-14900K integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K.

PCIe version2.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes420
USB revision3.0 and 2.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron N2807 505
i9-14900K 60724
+11925%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 11925% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N2807 142
i9-14900K 3089
+2075%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 2075% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N2807 240
i9-14900K 20887
+8603%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 8603% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron N2807 986
i9-14900K 12643
+1182%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 1182% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron N2807 2093
i9-14900K 94801
+4429%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 4429% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron N2807 57.4
i9-14900K 2.07
+2673%

Celeron N2807 outperforms Core i9-14900K by 2673% in wPrime 32.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron N2807 1
i9-14900K 72
+13278%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 13278% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N2807 65
i9-14900K 6282
+9565%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 9565% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N2807 35
i9-14900K 332
+849%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 849% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron N2807 0.26
i9-14900K 4.02
+1446%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 1446% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N2807 0.1
i9-14900K 26.7
+38043%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 38043% in TrueCrypt AES.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N2807 408
i9-14900K 16108
+3848%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 3848% in WinRAR 4.0.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N2807 3
i9-14900K 181
+5652%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 5652% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N2807 17
i9-14900K 346
+1931%

Core i9-14900K outperforms Celeron N2807 by 1931% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 February 2014 17 October 2023
Physical cores 2 24
Threads 2 32
Cost $107 $589
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 125 Watt

We couldn't decide between Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron N2807 is a notebook processor while Core i9-14900K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2807 and Core i9-14900K, 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 N2807
Celeron N2807
Intel Core i9-14900K
Core i9-14900K

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.


2.5 33 votes

Rate Celeron N2807 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1264 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N2807 or Core i9-14900K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.