OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i9-14900F review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£530PassMark multi-core score:46404N. of physical cores:24CPU boost clock speed:5.8 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i9-14900F Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

8.0/10

Overall score

Score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists, owners and ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 15%, Sentiment score 10%, User score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Score components

40%

8.5

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

15%

8.0

List score

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

User scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 8.4, the mark of a weaker model in this category

★Better than 91% of processors
7.9

Value for money

Value for money
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 78% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

7.7

Price

▲Better than 78%
8.5

Technical score

Technical score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components

60%

9.2

Performance

18%

7.4

Architecture

10%

8.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.3

Power & Thermal

4%

8.1

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

★Better than 94%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
No expert tests yet
?

User score

User score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How happy buyers are with this model, based on ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Enough data: A model needs at least 1 rating from across the web. Without one, it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
Share: User score counts 10% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
No ratings from across the web yet, so it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
No ratings from across the web yet
8.0

List score

List score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 15% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (1)
List score: in 1 of 68 lists (1%)
▲Better than 88%
  • No image
No image
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-14900F

Technical score
Technical score
8.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 94% of models
Score components:

60%

9.2

Performance

18%

7.4

Architecture

10%

8.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.3

Power & Thermal

4%

8.1

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

8.5
Reviews score
7.2
User score
?
List score
8.0
Value for money
Value for money
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 78% of models
Score components:

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

7.7

Price

7.9
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1700
This processor uses the LGA1700 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 8.4% of processors.
Chipset
Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680
This processor supports Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 86.4% of processors and equal to that of 2.3% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 88.2% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
24
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 24 CPU cores, which is more than 96.3% of processors and equal to 2.4% of processors.
CPU threads
32
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 32 CPU threads, which is more than 94.9% of processors and equal to 3.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
5.8 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.8 GHz which is higher than that of 99.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.0 GHz & 16x 1.5 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.0 GHz & 16x1.5 GHz which is higher than that of 91.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
46,404
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 46,404 in PassMark, which is higher than 94.6% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
36 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 36 MB which is larger than that of 92.3% of processors and equal to that of 2.1% of processors.
L2 cache
32 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 32 MB which is larger than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 2% of processors.
L1 cache
?
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,600 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.9% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-5600 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.4% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
192 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 192 GB of memory, which is more than 82.2% of processors and equal to 6.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 68% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 17.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
219 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 219 W which is higher than that of 92.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.7% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
?
Show more

Intel Core i9-14900F vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.05x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (46,404 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    46,404 vs 11,469
  • 18 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    24 vs 6
  • 2.17x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,325 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,325 vs 1,535
  • 76.1% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,505 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,505 vs 2,558
  • 31.8% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 24 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (32 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    32 vs 8
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
    LGA1700 vs FP5
  • 4 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
    2024 vs 2020
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 4.05x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (46,404 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    46,404 vs 11,469
  • 18 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (24 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    24 vs 6
  • 2.17x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,325 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,325 vs 1,535
  • 76.1% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,505 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,505 vs 2,558
  • 31.8% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 24 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (32 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    32 vs 8
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2 GHz & 16x1.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x2.0 GHz & 16x1.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2x higher bus transfer rate
    This processor has a higher bus transfer rate than the average processor (16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    16 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
  • 4x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (36 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    36 MB vs 9 MB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • 3.74x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (18.5 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    18.5 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
    5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
  • 3x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    192 GB vs 64 GB
  • 91% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 75% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5600 MHz vs 3200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3200 MHz.
    5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-5,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 3.42x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (219 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    219 W vs 64 W
  • 45.2% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (257 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    257 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 2.12x more expensive
    Intel Core i9-14900F is more expensive than the average processor (£530 vs £250).
    £530 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 8 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (20 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    20 vs 28
  • 45.2% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (257 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    257 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 3.42x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (219 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    219 W vs 64 W
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Not graded

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i9-14900F

  • A single-core score of 3325 in Geekbench 6 keeps daily work quick.
  • The 5.8 GHz boost clock keeps single tasks moving.
  • A cooler is included, so one purchase less.
  • 24 cores and 32 threads run many programs at once.
  • Supports up to 192 GB of memory at 5600 MHz.
  • Works with both DDR4 and DDR5 memory.

What we don't like about Intel Core i9-14900F

  • Boost power of 219 W needs a strong power supply and good cooling.
  • There is no integrated graphics, so a graphics card is required.
  • The clock multiplier is fixed at 20, so manual tuning is limited.
  • Software has to use all 32 threads to get the most from 24 cores.
  • The 100 °C maximum operating temperature means cooling has to keep up.

Verdict

A cooler in the box and a Geekbench 6 single-core score of 3325 make the Intel Core i9-14900F a good all-round chip for a new PC. It has 24 cores and 32 threads, so everyday programs and heavy jobs both feel quick. Its single-core speed is the main draw for games and daily work, and the 36 MB of L3 cache adds to that. Memory support goes up to 192 GB at 5600 MHz on DDR4 or DDR5 boards. The downside is power: it can boost to 219 W, so a solid cooler matters. There is no integrated graphics, and the clock multiplier is fixed at 20, so tuning is limited. It suits someone building a balanced PC who wants quick single-core speed and does not plan to tune the chip.

Compare Intel Core i9-14900F with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i9-14900F and other processors

No results found