Celeron 560 vs i7-9700F
Aggregate performance score
Core i7-9700F outperforms Celeron 560 by a whopping 3853% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1157 | 3521 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 6.09 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core i7 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.88 | 0.26 |
| Designer | Intel | Intel |
| Manufacturer | Intel | no data |
| Architecture codename | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) | no data |
| Release date | 23 April 2019 (6 years ago) | 1 January 2008 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $323 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560 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 cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | no data |
| Threads | 8 | no data |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.13 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.7 GHz | no data |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 30 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.95V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | FCLGA1151 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 2.0 | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | - |
| TSX | + | - |
| Idle States | + | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| SIPP | + | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | - |
| EDB | + | + |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | - |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2666 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 128 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-9700F and Celeron 560.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.51 | 0.19 |
| Recency | 23 April 2019 | 1 January 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 31 Watt |
i7-9700F has a 3852.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron 560, on the other hand, has 109.7% lower power consumption.
The Intel Core i7-9700F is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 560 in performance tests.
Note that Core i7-9700F is a desktop processor while Celeron 560 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
