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 i9-14900KS review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£650PassMark multi-core score:60243N. of physical cores:24CPU boost clock speed:6.2 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):150 W

Intel Core i9-14900KS Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 20 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i9-14900KS
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 and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment 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 94% of models
Score components

40%

8.6

Technical score

25%

7.2

Reviews score

25%

8.0

List score

10%

7.0

Sentiment score

★Better than 94% of processors
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 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 71% of models
Score components

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

7.1

Price

▲Better than 71%
8.6

Technical score

Technical score
8.6/ 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 96% of models
Score components

60%

9.6

Performance

18%

7.6

Architecture

10%

9.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

3.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated graphics

★Better than 96%
7.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.2/ 10
✕
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
▼ Worse than 59% of models

80%

6.7

Average grade

20%

9.2

Popularity

Grades by review (20)
12 reviews: 7 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 59%
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 25% 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 83 lists (1%)
▲Better than 89%
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
  • intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
intel-core-i9-14900ks
Where to buy
*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.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i9-14900KS

Based on 10 · 8

Reviewers praise blazing clock speeds and single-core speed, but agree it runs very hot and draws enormous power.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i9-14900KS

Based on 41 owners sharing their experience in online comments

49%positive14%mixed37%negative

Owners praise its exceptional speed for gaming and demanding work, while heat, power draw, and tuning demands temper the experience.

What owners dislike

  • Under sustained high load, a standard AIO often cannot keep the chip under 80°C, so it throttles, even at lower power.7
  • Stock settings underperform, so owners need the latest beta BIOS, power limit changes and voltage curve tweaks to reach advertised speeds.7
  • Some owners returned chips after crashes or a voltage drift problem, and some say heavy tasks like Unreal Engine 5 shader compiling need more voltage.5
  • Under full load the chip can draw 330 to 400 watts, and owners say it stays high unless power limits are set.4
  • Owners say the advertised 5.9 GHz is hard to hold, even while gaming, and some cannot get near it without manual limits.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-14900KS

Technical score
Technical score
8.6/ 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 96% of models
Score components:

60%

9.6

Performance

18%

7.6

Architecture

10%

9.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

3.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated graphics

8.6
Reviews score
7.2
List score
8.0
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 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 71% of models
Score components:

70%

8.0

Overall score

30%

7.1

Price

7.7
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
What reviewers say
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
6.2 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 6.2 GHz which is higher than that of 100% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.2 GHz & 16x 2.4 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.2 GHz & 16x2.4 GHz which is higher than that of 97.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
60,243
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 60,243 in PassMark, which is higher than 97.7% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
2,176 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 2,176 KB which is larger than that of 96.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.1% of processors.
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
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 770
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 770 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 57.8% of processors and equal to that in 4.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
32
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 85.4% of processors and equal to 5.4% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
150 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 150 W which is higher than that of 95.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
150 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 150 W which is higher than that of 95.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
253 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 253 W which is higher than that of 98.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i9-14900KS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.83x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (25,174 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    25,174 vs 5,209
  • 5.25x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (60,243 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    60,243 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
  • 88.4% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,819 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,819 vs 2,558
  • 5.56x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (15,599 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    15,599 vs 2,804.5
  • 2.11x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,234 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,234 vs 1,535
  • 40.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (6.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    6.2 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
  • 7.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.2/ 10
    ✕
    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
    ▼ Worse than 59% of models

    80%

    6.7

    Average grade

    20%

    9.2

    Popularity

    Grades by review (20)
    12 reviews: 7 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 8 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.2 vs 6.7
  • 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).
    March 2024
    2024 vs 2020
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 4.83x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (25,174 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    25,174 vs 5,209
  • 5.25x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (60,243 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    60,243 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
  • 88.4% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,819 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,819 vs 2,558
  • 5.56x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (15,599 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    15,599 vs 2,804.5
  • 2.11x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,234 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,234 vs 1,535
  • 40.9% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (6.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    6.2 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
  • 85.5% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (909 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    909 vs 490
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.2 GHz & 16x2.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.2 GHz & 16x2.4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 43.2% faster Blender rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (570 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    570.04 vs 398.015
  • 2 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    6 vs 4
  • 51.7% faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (515.7 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    515.74 vs 340.075
  • 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
  • More advanced Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Turbo Boost Max 3
    3.0 vs 2.0
  • 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 more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 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
  • 5.67x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (2,176 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    2,176 KB vs 384 KB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • 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
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 75% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 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
  • 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
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 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
  • 3.95x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (253 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    253 W vs 64 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 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
  • 3.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    150 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
  • 2.6x more expensive
    Intel Core i9-14900KS is more expensive than the average processor (£650 vs £250).
    £650 vs £250
  • 2.6x more expensive
    Intel Core i9-14900KS is more expensive than the average processor (£650 vs £250).
    £650 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
  • 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, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 3.95x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (253 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    253 W vs 64 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 3.33x higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 W
  • 3.33x higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (150 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    150 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

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

6.0
PC H/W and Tech Unboxings 🔥
≈ estimated
13/04/2025
Benchmark test · Cinebench runs and default power limits
Verdict
Intel Core i9-14900KS posts strong multi-core scores, but thermal and power limit throttling need undervolting to fix.
6.0
Bang4BuckPC Gamer
≈ estimated
06/05/2024
Benchmark test · performance vs extreme power profile
Verdict
Intel Core i9-14900KS gets clearly higher FPS in the extreme power profile, but it draws much more power and runs hotter.
4.0
ShortCircuit
≈ estimated
20/04/2024
Hands-on review · power, temperature and benchmark tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-14900KS is barely faster for much more power and heat, so it only suits enthusiasts.
6.0
TechPowerUp
≈ estimated
19/03/2024
Hands-on review · performance, power and temperature tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-14900KS is the fastest chip for raw performance, but expensive, power-hungry and poor value.
4.0
der8auer EN
≈ estimated
14/03/2024
Hands-on review · power, cooling and gaming tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-14900KS is an enthusiast chip with a small speed gain and extreme power draw, and AMD is usually the better buy.
7.0
OC3D TV
≈ estimated
14/03/2024
Hands-on review · undervolting, heat and power tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-14900KS delivers impressive speed, but it runs very hot, is costly and suits only enthusiasts willing to undervolt.
Not graded
Overview video
Overview video
Brand video
Not graded
Shop video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
14/03/2024
Benchmark review · Gaming vs productivity
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is a fast lightly threaded chip at 6.2GHz, but AMD's X3D chips lead in gaming and it barely beats the 14900K.
9.0
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
14/03/2024
Hands-on test · Clocks and cooling
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is a fast single-threaded chip at 6.2GHz that fits existing LGA1700 boards, but it needs a strong cooler and draws a lot of power.
5.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
10/04/2024
Lab test · Stability and cooling
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS barely beats the 14900K and crashed under heavy load with a 240mm cooler, so most buyers should choose a 13900K.
6.0
pugetsystems.com
≈ estimated
19/03/2024
Lab test · Content creation
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is 2–15% faster than the 14900K in content creation, mostly in CPU rendering, so most creators won't need it.
9.0
tweaktown.com
✓ explicit
08/04/2024
Benchmark review · Cooling and power
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS suits enthusiasts who want maximum clocks, but it needs top-end cooling and plenty of power.
5.0
uk.pcmag.com
✓ explicit
10/04/2024
Lab review · Stability and cooling
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is hard to recommend: it is only 200MHz faster than the 14900K and crashed in Cinebench with a 240mm cooler.
7.5
cgmagonline.com
✓ explicit
08/08/2024
Lab test · Gaming and productivity
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is a top single-core and gaming chip for enthusiasts, but its heat and power draw make it a hard sell for most buyers.
8.0
xda-developers.com
✓ explicit
17/03/2024
Lab test · Stress and benchmarks
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS handles creative and gaming workloads well, but it needs a capable cooler and a strong power supply.
10
guru3d.com
✓ explicit
27/03/2024
Lab test · Benchmark breakdown
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is a 32-thread chip that boosts to 6.2GHz without overclocking, mainly suited to buyers who want top Intel speed on Z790 or Z690 boards.
7.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
14/03/2024
Lab test · Gaming and power
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS is Intel's first desktop chip rated at 6.2GHz and the fastest in applications, but AMD's X3D chips still lead in games.
7.0
tweakers.net
≈ estimated
12/04/2024
Gaming benchmarks · AMD comparison
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-14900KS beats the 14900K in most games, but AMD's X3D chips still lead in many titles.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-14900KS

  • World-record clock speeds reaching up to 6.2 GHz out of the box
  • Highest-binned silicon available for the LGA 1700 platform
  • Exceptional single-threaded performance for snappier desktop use
  • Strong multi-threading capabilities with 24 cores (8P + 16E)
  • Ideal 'tuner's dream' for extreme overclockers using advanced cooling
  • Support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory on 600/700 series motherboards

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-14900KS

  • Extremely high power consumption, often exceeding 300-350W under load
  • Severe heat generation that frequently leads to thermal throttling at 100°C
  • Minimal real-world performance gains (2-5%) over the cheaper i9-14900K
  • Requires high-end cooling (360mm+ AIO or custom loops) to avoid system crashes
  • Widely reported stability issues, including BSODs and game crashes
  • Poor value proposition due to high MSRP and significant electricity costs
  • End-of-life platform with no further upgrade path for the LGA 1700 socket

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-14900KS is a high-performance, special edition desktop processor built on the Raptor Lake Refresh architecture, featuring 24 cores (8 Performance-cores and 16 Efficient-cores) and 32 threads. It distinguishes itself with a record-breaking maximum turbo frequency of 6.2 GHz, supported by a 3.2 GHz P-core base clock, 36MB of Intel Smart Cache, and compatibility with the LGA 1700 socket. Main pros include its position as the fastest single-threaded consumer CPU on the market, excellent gaming and content creation performance, and top-tier silicon binning for enthusiasts and overclockers. However, significant cons include extreme power consumption that can exceed 400W under full load, exceptionally high thermal output requiring premium cooling solutions, and a high price point that offers diminishing performance returns compared to the standard i9-14900K.

Compare Intel Core i9-14900KS 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 i9-14900KS and other processors

No results found