i9-14900KF vs i9-9820X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i9-9820X
2018
10 cores / 20 threads, 165 Watt
12.74
Core i9-14900KF
2023
24 cores / 32 threads, 125 Watt
37.49
+194%

Core i9-14900KF outperforms Core i9-9820X by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking59883
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.0866.72
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Core i9no data
Power efficiency7.3128.38
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2018)Raptor Lake-R (2023−2024)
Release date19 October 2018 (6 years ago)17 October 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$898$564

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i9-14900KF has 1213% better value for money than i9-9820X.

Detailed specifications

Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF 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 cores10 (Deca-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads2032
Base clock speed3.3 GHz3.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz5.8 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier33no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2 MB (per core)
L3 cache16.5 MB (shared)36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature92 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF 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
SocketFCLGA2066FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0++
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size128 GB192 GB
Max memory channels42
Maximum memory bandwidth85.33 GB/s89.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes4416

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.

i9-9820X 12.74
i9-14900KF 37.49
+194%

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.

i9-9820X 20229
i9-14900KF 59554
+194%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.74 37.49
Recency 19 October 2018 17 October 2023
Physical cores 10 24
Threads 20 32
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 125 Watt

i9-14900KF has a 194.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 140% more physical cores and 60% more threads, and 32% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-14900KF is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i9-9820X in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-9820X and Core i9-14900KF, 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 Core i9-9820X
Core i9-9820X
Intel Core i9-14900KF
Core i9-14900KF

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.


3.2 44 votes

Rate Core i9-9820X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 336 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-9820X or Core i9-14900KF, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.