Key Differences
In short — Core i9-14900F outperforms the cheaper Core i7-10700 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i7-10700 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-14900F is 1348 days newer than the cheaper Core i7-10700.
Advantages of Core i7-10700
- Up to 47% cheaper than Core i9-14900F - £264.99 vs £499.98
- Up to 38% better value when playing Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i9-14900F - £1.39 vs £2.24 per FPS
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-14900F doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Core i9-14900F
- Performs up to 17% better in Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0 than Core i7-10700 - 223 vs 191 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i7-10700 - 32 vs 16 threads
Call of Duty: Warzone 2.0
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
191
86%
Value, £/FPS
£1.39/FPS
100%
Price, £
£264.99
100%
Value Winner
Buy for £264.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 363 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
FPS
223
100%
Value, £/FPS
£2.24/FPS
62%
Price, £
£499.98
53%
FPS Winner
Buy for £499.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 639 minutes ago
My Games
With selected game settings
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Extreme
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Jan 8th, 2024
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Core i7-10700 | vs | Core i9-14900F |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Jan 8th, 2024 |
Core i7 | Collection | Core i9 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Raptor Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1700 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
8 | Cores | 24 |
16 | Threads | 32 |
2.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.0 GHz |
4.8 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 5.8 GHz |
65 W | TDP | Not Available |
14 nm | Process Size | 10 nm |
29.0x | Multiplier | 20.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | No |