Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900F outperforms the cheaper Celeron G6900 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Core i9-10900F is 614 days older than the cheaper Celeron G6900.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900F
- Performs up to 1% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Celeron G6900 - 136 vs 135 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G6900 - 20 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G6900
- Up to 75% cheaper than Core i9-10900F - €66.9 vs €264.87
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Buy for €264.87 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 74498 minutes ago
Buy for €66.9 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 74498 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Jan 4th, 2022
Single-Core
1603
95.64439140811456%
Multi-Core
2696
31.996202231189173%
Intel Core i9-10900F | vs | Intel Celeron G6900 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Jan 4th, 2022 |
Core i9 | Collection | Celeron |
Comet Lake | Codename | Alder Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 2 |
20 | Threads | 2 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
5.2 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
65 W | TDP | Not Available |
14 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 710 |
No | Overclockable | No |