Key Differences
In short — Core i9-10900KF outperforms the cheaper Celeron G4900 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Celeron G4900 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i9-10900KF is 758 days newer than the cheaper Celeron G4900.
Advantages of Intel Core i9-10900KF
- Performs up to 23% better in Star Wars Jedi: Survivor than Celeron G4900 - 136 vs 111 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G4900 - 20 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G4900
- Up to 74% cheaper than Core i9-10900KF - $68.02 vs $260.0
- Up to 68% better value when playing Star Wars Jedi: Survivor than Core i9-10900KF - $0.61 vs $1.91 per FPS
- Consumes up to 57% less energy than Intel Core i9-10900KF - 54 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i9-10900KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Star Wars Jedi: Survivor
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Buy for $260 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10517 minutes ago
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
FPS
111
81%
Value, $/FPS
$0.61/FPS
100%
Price, $
$68.02
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $68.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 10517 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Epic
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Apr 3rd, 2018
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i9-10900KF | vs | Intel Celeron G4900 |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Apr 3rd, 2018 |
Core i9 | Collection | Celeron |
Comet Lake | Codename | Coffee Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
10 | Cores | 2 |
20 | Threads | 2 |
3.7 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.1 GHz |
5.3 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 54 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
37.0x | Multiplier | 31.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 610 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |