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 i9-14901E review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£470PassMark multi-core score:30298N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:5.6 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i9-14901E Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.6/10

Overall score

Score
7.6/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 83% of models
Score components

40%

8.2

Technical score

25%

?

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

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

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

â–²Better than 83% of processors
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 77% of models
Score components

70%

7.6

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

â–²Better than 77%
8.2

Technical score

Technical score
8.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 89% of models
Score components

60%

8.7

Performance

18%

7.4

Architecture

10%

8.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

4.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 89%
?

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
â–¼
<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.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 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 (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £470
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 i9-14901E

    Technical score
    Technical score
    8.2/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    8.7

    Performance

    18%

    7.4

    Architecture

    10%

    8.9

    Memory & PCIe

    7%

    4.6

    Power & Thermal

    4%

    8.2

    Platform

    1%

    8.0

    Integrated graphics

    8.2
    Reviews score
    7.2
    List score
    ?
    Value for money
    Value for money
    7.8/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Score components:

    70%

    7.6

    Overall score

    30%

    8.0

    Price

    7.8
    Processor type
    embedded
    This processor belongs to the embedded processor class, which is less advanced than that of 93.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.9% of processors.
    industrial/edge
    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
    Intel 600 Series, Intel 700 Series
    This processor supports Intel 600 Series, Intel 700 Series chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 81.6% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% 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, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
    This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
    Show more
    N. of physical cores
    8
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
    CPU threads
    16
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
    CPU boost clock speed
    5.6 GHz
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.6 GHz which is higher than that of 97.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
    CPU base clock speed
    8x 2.8 GHz
    This processor has a base clock of 8x2.8 GHz which is higher than that of 71.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
    PassMark multi-core score
    30,298
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor scores 30,298 in PassMark, which is higher than 86.2% 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
    16 MB
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has an L2 cache of 16 MB which is larger than that of 88.4% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% of processors.
    L1 cache
    640 KB
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has an L1 cache of 640 KB which is larger than that of 73.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% 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)
    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)
    28 seconds
    Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
    This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
    Configurable TDP
    no
    This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
    Show more

    Intel Core i9-14901E vs the average processor

    246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
    • 3.13x higher multi-core score
      This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (16,308 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
      16,308 vs 5,209
    • 2.64x higher PassMark score
      This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (30,298 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      30,298 vs 11,469
    • 70.2% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,354 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      4,354 vs 2,558
    • 96.6% higher single-core score
      This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,018 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
      3,018 vs 1,535
    • 27.3% higher boost clock
      This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
      5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
    • 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
    • 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
    • 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
    • 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).
      July 2024
      2024 vs 2020
    • 3.13x higher multi-core score
      This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (16,308 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
      16,308 vs 5,209
    • 2.64x higher PassMark score
      This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (30,298 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      30,298 vs 11,469
    • 70.2% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,354 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      4,354 vs 2,558
    • 96.6% higher single-core score
      This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,018 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
      3,018 vs 1,535
    • 27.3% higher boost clock
      This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
      5.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
    • 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
    • 8 more CPU threads
      This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
      16 vs 8
    • 2 more CPU cores
      This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      8 vs 6
    • Higher base clock
      This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
      8x2.8 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
    • 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
    • 5.33x larger L2 cache
      This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (16 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
      16 MB vs 3 MB
    • 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
    • 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
    • 66.7% larger L1 cache
      This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (640 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
      640 KB vs 384 KB
    • 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 (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
    • 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
    • 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
    • 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
    • No configurable TDP
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 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
    • 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
    • Limited PCIe bifurcation
      This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
      x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
    • Weaker security extensions
      This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
      AES-NI, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
    • 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
    • 88% more expensive
      Intel Core i9-14901E is more expensive than the average processor (£470 vs £250).
      £470 vs £250
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 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, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
      AES-NI, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT, TME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
    • 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
    • Limited PCIe bifurcation
      This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
      x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
    • 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
    • No configurable TDP
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • 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

    Third-party reviews

    What customers like about Intel Core i9-14901E

    • Exceptional single-threaded performance, making it a leader for tasks that rely on per-core speed
    • Highly power efficient for a high-end chip, featuring a low 65W TDP compared to standard flagship models
    • Elimination of E-cores simplifies workload scheduling and may improve stability for specific gaming and server applications
    • Supports modern standards including DDR5-5600 memory, PCIe Gen 5, and ECC memory for mission-critical stability
    • Excellent for mixed workloads, balancing workstation productivity with smooth gaming performance

    What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-14901E

    • Locked multiplier prevents manual overclocking, limiting performance gains for enthusiast users
    • Significantly lower multi-threaded performance compared to models with E-cores (like the i9-14900K), trailing in heavily parallelized tasks
    • The 65W TDP can be misleading, as the processor often requires more substantial cooling than expected under full turbo loads
    • Relies on the aging Intel 7 manufacturing process, which some reviewers consider outdated compared to newer architectures
    • Lower base clock (2.8 GHz) compared to higher-wattage variants like the 14901KE

    Verdict

    The Intel Core i9-14901E is a high-performance Raptor Lake Refresh desktop processor designed for embedded systems, featuring a unique configuration of 8 Performance-cores and 0 Efficient-cores, providing 16 threads. It operates with a base frequency of 2.8 GHz and can reach a maximum turbo frequency of 5.6 GHz, supported by 36 MB of Intel Smart Cache and 16 MB of L2 cache. Key advantages include a relatively efficient 65W TDP, integrated Intel UHD Graphics 770, support for up to 192 GB of DDR5-5600 or DDR4-3200 memory, and ECC compatibility for mission-critical reliability. However, its main drawbacks are the lack of E-cores for background task efficiency and a locked multiplier that restricts traditional overclocking capabilities.

    Compare Intel Core i9-14901E 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 i9-14901E and other processors

    No results found