Key Differences
In short — Core i9-14900KF outperforms the cheaper Celeron G3900 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G3900 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-14900KF is 2968 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G3900.
Advantages of Celeron G3900
- Up to 90% cheaper than Core i9-14900KF - $32.39 vs $338.95
- Up to 86% better value when playing Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Core i9-14900KF - $0.31 vs $2.27 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-14900KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Core i9-14900KF
- Performs up to 42% better in Dying Light 2: Stay Human than Celeron G3900 - 166 vs 117 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3900 - 32 vs 2 threads
Dying Light 2: Stay Human
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
FPS
117
70%
Value, €/FPS
€0.31/FPS
100%
Price, €
€35.95
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €35.95 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 105 minutes ago
Desktop • Oct 17th, 2023
FPS
166
100%
Value, €/FPS
€2.27/FPS
14%
Price, €
€376.23
9%
FPS Winner
Buy for €376.23 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 105 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High Quality Raytracing
Desktop • Sep 1st, 2015
Desktop • Oct 17th, 2023
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Celeron G3900 | vs | Core i9-14900KF |
---|---|---|
Sep 1st, 2015 | Release Date | Oct 17th, 2023 |
Celeron | Collection | Core i9 |
Skylake | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 1151 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 24 |
2 | Threads | 32 |
2.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.2 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 6.0 GHz |
51 W | TDP | Not Available |
14 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
28.0x | Multiplier | 32.0x |
Intel HD 510 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |