i9-14900F vs Xeon Gold 6142

VS

Aggregate performance score

Xeon Gold 6142
2017
16 cores / 32 threads, 150 Watt
16.48
Core i9-14900F
2024
24 cores / 32 threads, 65 Watt
30.78
+86.8%

Core i9-14900F outperforms Xeon Gold 6142 by an impressive 87% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking418142
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.5148.83
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Xeon Goldno data
Power efficiency10.0243.18
Architecture codenameSkylake (server) (2017−2019)Raptor Lake-R (2023−2024)
Release date25 April 2017 (7 years ago)8 January 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$2,946$524

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

i9-14900F has 983% better value for money than Xeon Gold 6142.

Detailed specifications

Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads3232
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz5.6 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier26no data
L1 cache1 MB80 KB (per core)
L2 cache16 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache22 MB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature85 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F 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 configuration4 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketFCLGA3647FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology2.02.0
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX++
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory size768 GB192 GB
Max memory channels62
Maximum memory bandwidth128.001 GB/s89.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes4816

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.

Xeon Gold 6142 16.48
i9-14900F 30.78
+86.8%

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.

Xeon Gold 6142 25215
i9-14900F 47100
+86.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.48 30.78
Recency 25 April 2017 8 January 2024
Physical cores 16 24
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 65 Watt

i9-14900F has a 86.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 50% more physical cores, and 130.8% lower power consumption.

The Core i9-14900F is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon Gold 6142 in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon Gold 6142 is a server/workstation processor while Core i9-14900F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon Gold 6142 and Core i9-14900F, 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 Xeon Gold 6142
Xeon Gold 6142
Intel Core i9-14900F
Core i9-14900F

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.


5 2 votes

Rate Xeon Gold 6142 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 78 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon Gold 6142 or Core i9-14900F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.