Celeron N3060 vs Core i9-9900K

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking642not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.56no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore i9 (Desktop)Intel Celeron
Architecture codenameCoffee Lake-R (2018−2019)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date8 October 2018 (5 years ago)15 January 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$488$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads162
Base clock speed3.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0IDI
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
L1 cache512 KBno data
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache16 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14++ nm14 nm
Die size178 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketLGA-1151FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
SIPP+-

Security technologies

Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-d+no data
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size128 GB8 GB
Maximum memory bandwidth44.668 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 630Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes164

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.

i9-9900K 18281
+2653%
Celeron N3060 664

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.

i9-9900K 7933
+526%
Celeron N3060 1267

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.

i9-9900K 48779
+1935%
Celeron N3060 2397

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.

i9-9900K 3.58
+1105%
Celeron N3060 43.13

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.

i9-9900K 21
+2477%
Celeron N3060 1

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

i9-9900K 1979
+2630%
Celeron N3060 73

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.

i9-9900K 212
+458%
Celeron N3060 38

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.

i9-9900K 2.38
+441%
Celeron N3060 0.44

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.

i9-9900K 11.1
+2367%
Celeron N3060 0.5

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.  

i9-9900K 114
+1996%
Celeron N3060 5

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.  

i9-9900K 261
+817%
Celeron N3060 28

Pros & cons summary


Recency 8 October 2018 15 January 2016
Physical cores 8 2
Threads 16 2
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 6 Watt

i9-9900K has an age advantage of 2 years, and 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads.

Celeron N3060, on the other hand, has 1483.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Core i9-9900K is a desktop processor while Celeron N3060 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i9-9900K and Celeron N3060, 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 i9-9900K
Core i9-9900K
Intel Celeron N3060
Celeron N3060

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.


3.8 2262 votes

Rate Core i9-9900K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 736 votes

Rate Celeron N3060 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i9-9900K or Celeron N3060, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.