Key Differences
In short — Core i9-9900KF outperforms Celeron B820 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-9900KF is 2382 days newer than Celeron B820.
Advantages of Celeron B820
- Consumes up to 63% less energy than Intel Core i9-9900KF - 35 vs 95 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-9900KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Core i9-9900KF
- Performs up to 91% better in Counter-Strike 2 than Celeron B820 - 404 vs 212 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron B820 - 16 vs 2 threads
Counter-Strike 2
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
FPS
404
100%
Value, CA$/FPS
CA$1.18/FPS
100%
Price, CA$
CA$474.98
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for CA$474.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 385 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Very High
Mobile • Jul 1st, 2012
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2019
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron B820 | vs | Core i9-9900KF |
---|---|---|
Jul 1st, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2019 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
Sandy Bridge | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Mobile | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 8 |
2 | Threads | 16 |
1.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.6 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.0 GHz |
35 W | TDP | 95 W |
32 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
17.0x | Multiplier | 36.0x |
Intel HD (Sandy Bridge) | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |