Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core i9-14900F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 7 251E and the Intel Core i9-14900F share identical core and thread counts, yet the recorded benchmark data places them in different performance tiers. The Core i9-14900F holds an average benchmark score of 60,008, placing it at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmark scores, an average score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile. This gap in measured performance is the central finding of the comparison.

The Core i9-14900F delivers a multi-core score of 39,551 in Cinebench R23. The same processor produces 16,611 in Cinebench R20 and 3,986 in Cinebench R15 multi-core tests. Single-core results follow a similar pattern, with 5,583 in Cinebench R23, 2,344 in Cinebench R20, and 562 in Cinebench R15. Geekbench scores for the Core i9-14900F reach 20,008 in multi-core and 2,570 in single-core.

PassMark results for the Core i9-14900F show a multi-thread score of 46,532 and a single-thread score of 4,506. The processor achieves 177,066 in integer math, 119,550 in floating point math, and 31,084 in extended instructions. Data compression scores reach 564,207, while data encryption records 34,644. Additional PassMark components include 63,728 in random string sorting, 2,899 in physics, and 209 in find prime numbers.

The Core 7 251E has no comparable benchmark entries in the database. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, which places it at the 50th percentile relative to all CPUs. The Core i9-14900F, by contrast, holds a 92nd percentile position. This means the Core i9-14900F outperforms the vast majority of processors in the database, while the Core 7 251E sits at the median with no measured results to confirm its actual performance.

The nearest rivals for the Core i9-14900F provide context for its standing. The AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX records an average score of 60,099, which is 0.2% higher than the Core i9-14900F. The AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX scores 60,104, also 0.2% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D scores 59,641, which is 0.6% lower. The Intel Xeon Gold 6338T scores 60,572, which is 0.9% higher. These deltas are small, indicating that the Core i9-14900F is tightly clustered with these competing processors in aggregate performance.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i9-14900F perform in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core i9-14900F records a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,551 and a single-core score of 5,583.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core 7 251E?

A: The Core 7 251E has an average benchmark score of 0, with no individual benchmark results recorded in the database.

Q: What percentile does the Intel Core i9-14900F occupy?

A: The Core i9-14900F sits at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 60,008.

Q: Are the core and thread counts the same for both processors?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 7 251E and the Intel Core i9-14900F have 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the Intel Core i9-14900F?

A: The nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX at 60,099 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX at 60,104 (0.2% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D at 59,641 (0.6% lower), and the Intel Xeon Gold 6338T at 60,572 (0.9% higher).

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Intel Core i9-14900F has no integrated graphics.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i9-14900F wins in every measured benchmark category because it is the only one of the two with recorded results. The database shows 19 individual benchmark scores for the Core i9-14900F, covering Cinebench R15, R20, R23, Geekbench, and multiple PassMark tests. The Core 7 251E has no benchmark data, so no direct win can be assigned to it.

The Core i9-14900F is positioned for heavy multi-threaded workloads based on its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 39,551 and PassMark multi-thread score of 46,532. Its PassMark integer math score of 177,066 and floating point math score of 119,550 indicate strength in computational tasks. Data compression at 564,207 and random string sorting at 63,728 suggest solid performance in data processing scenarios.

The Core 7 251E, without recorded benchmarks, cannot claim a win in any measured test. Its specification sheet lists 24 cores, 32 threads, a 5.60 GHz boost clock, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache, which are identical to the Core i9-14900F in core count, thread count, and L3 cache. The Core 7 251E also includes UHD Graphics 770, giving it a functional advantage in systems that require integrated display output, a feature the Core i9-14900F lacks entirely.

For use cases that depend on measured performance, the Core i9-14900F is the clear choice. For systems that need integrated graphics and can operate without benchmark-verified performance, the Core 7 251E offers that capability. The Core 7 251E also carries a launch MSRP of $384, while the Core i9-14900F has a launch MSRP of $524, a difference that may factor into selection for cost-sensitive builds.

Specification Differences

The two processors share many core specifications. Both have 24 cores, 32 threads, 65 W TDP, Intel Socket 1700, 10 nm process node, 257 mm² die size, 80 KB L1 cache per core, 2 MB L2 cache per core, and 36 MB shared L3 cache. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over dual-channel buses, both support ECC memory, and both use PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. Both are desktop processors with active production status and locked multipliers.

The differences begin with clock speeds. The Core 7 251E has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Core i9-14900F has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The Core i9-14900F boosts 0.20 GHz higher, while the Core 7 251E has a 0.10 GHz higher base clock.

Memory bandwidth differs in the recorded data. The Core 7 251E lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core i9-14900F has no memory bandwidth value recorded. Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 7 251E includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Core i9-14900F lists N/A for integrated graphics.

Release dates separate the two as well. The Core i9-14900F launched on 2024-01-07, while the Core 7 251E launched on 2025-01-12. The launch MSRP values are $524 for the Core i9-14900F and $384 for the Core 7 251E. Part numbers also differ, with the Core 7 251E carrying part number SRQDUQ657 and the Core i9-14900F carrying SRQDUQ657 and SRN3W in the records.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 251E belongs to the Bartlett Lake codename family, with its generation listed as Core 7 (Bartlett Lake). The Core i9-14900F belongs to the Raptor Lake architecture, with its codename listed as Raptor Lake-R and its generation as Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh). Both processors are fabricated by Intel on a 10 nm process node, and both use a 257 mm² die size.

The cache structures are identical in the recorded data. Both processors use 80 KB L1 cache per core, 2 MB L2 cache per core, and 36 MB shared L3 cache. No 3D V-Cache is present on either processor, and no total L3 cache figure is listed separately.

The Core 7 251E has a series value of null in the database, while the Core i9-14900F is assigned to the Core 14th Gen series. The Core 7 251E also lacks an architecture field, with only the codename Bartlett Lake recorded. The Core i9-14900F has both an architecture field (Raptor Lake) and a codename (Raptor Lake-R), providing a clearer lineage within Intel's product stack.

Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory, dual-channel memory buses, and ECC memory. Both use PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core 7 251E lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, a figure absent for the Core i9-14900F. The presence of UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 7 251E versus N/A on the Core i9-14900F represents the most significant feature divergence, affecting which systems can operate without a discrete graphics card.