In Battlefield 6, the Core i7-2820QM is much slower than the Core i9-14900F. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i7-2820QM
- Consumes up to 31% less energy – 45 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 31% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Core i9-14900F
- Up to 113% faster in Battlefield 6 – 130 vs 61 FPS
- Up to 113% faster in Battlefield 6
- Is 13 years and 4 days newer – Jan 08, 2024 vs Jan 03, 2011
- Is 13 years and 4 days newer
Battlefield 6 FPS Calculator
Core i7-2820QM vs Core i9-14900F: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i9-14900F
Jan 8th, 2024
Average FPS
130 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
98 FPS
100%
Price, $
$559.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$4.3/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-2820QM vs Core i9-14900F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-2820QM vs Core i9-14900F in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-2820QM
Jan 3rd, 2011
Cores
4-core
17%
L3 Cache
8 MB
22%
Base Frequency
2.3 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
3.4 GHz
59%
Max. unknown RAM Speed
MHz
Core i9-14900F
Jan 8th, 2024
Cores
24-core
100%
L3 Cache
36 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2 GHz
87%
Turbo Frequency
5.8 GHz
100%
Max. DDR5 RAM Speed
5600 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i7-2820QM Jan 3rd, 2011 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i9-14900F Jan 8th, 2024 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jan 3rd, 2011 | Released | Jan 8th, 2024 |
| – | MSRP | $524.00 |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGAG2 (988B) | Socket | LGA1700 |
45 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| unknown | RAM | 3200 MHz (DDR4), 5600 MHz (DDR5) |
Intel HD 3000 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Not Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
