Key Differences
In short — Core i9-14900F outperforms the cheaper Celeron G1620 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-14900F is 4053 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G1620.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-14900F
- Performs up to 34% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Celeron G1620 - 223 vs 167 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G1620 - 32 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G1620
- Up to 95% cheaper than Core i9-14900F - CA$32.99 vs CA$658.97
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-14900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Buy for CA$658.97 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 177 minutes ago
Buy for CA$32.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 178 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Dec 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
409
13.543046357615893%
Multi-Core
723
3.9573070607553364%
Intel Core i9-14900F | vs | Intel Celeron G1620 |
---|---|---|
Jan 8th, 2024 | Release Date | Dec 3rd, 2012 |
Core i9 | Collection | Celeron |
Raptor Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1700 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
24 | Cores | 2 |
32 | Threads | 2 |
2.0 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.7 GHz |
5.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
Not Available | TDP | 55 W |
10 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
20.0x | Multiplier | 27.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD |
No | Overclockable | No |