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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the Intel Core i9-14900F across every benchmark in the comparison set. Of the 17 head-to-head tests, the i9-14900F wins all 17, with the Core 7 251TE failing to take a single test. The margins are substantial and consistent, indicating a clear performance hierarchy rather than a workload-dependent split.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-14900F scores 39551 against 25518 for the Core 7 251TE, a delta of -35.5% from the perspective of the 251TE. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 5583 versus 3602, also a -35.5% gap. This consistency across both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench tests suggests the i9-14900F holds an advantage that is not tied to core count scaling alone, since both processors share the same 24-core, 32-thread configuration.

The Cinebench R15 and R20 results reinforce the pattern. R15 multi-core shows 3986 for the i9-14900F against 2572 for the 251TE (-35.5%), while R15 single-core shows 562 versus 362 (-35.6%). R20 multi-core shows 16611 versus 10717 (-35.5%), and R20 single-core shows 2344 versus 1512 (-35.5%). The near-identical delta percentages across these rendering workloads point to a uniform clock-for-clock advantage rather than any architecture-specific scaling quirk.

PassMark results widen the gap further in several categories. The largest relative deficit for the Core 7 251TE appears in extended instructions, where the i9-14900F scores 31084 versus 16974, a -45.4% delta. Data compression shows 564207 against 334399 (-40.7%), and random string sorting shows 63728 versus 39643 (-37.8%). These are compute-heavy, instruction-dense workloads where the i9-14900F's higher boost clock appears to translate directly into throughput.

Data encryption shows 34644 versus 22176 (-36%), and multi-thread PassMark shows 46532 versus 30022 (-35.5%). Integer math shows 177066 versus 125739 (-29%), while floating-point math shows 119550 versus 85607 (-28.4%). The smallest gaps appear in single-thread PassMark, where the i9-14900F scores 4506 against 3568, a -20.8% delta, and in find prime numbers, where 209 beats 140 (-33%). Even the narrowest margin remains a double-digit percentage deficit, which indicates that the Core 7 251TE does not present a competitive alternative in any measured metric.

The average benchmark scores in the database confirm the overall standing. The Core 7 251TE averages 41650, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the i9-14900F averages 60008 and sits in the 92nd percentile. The nearest rivals for the 251TE are the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H (41621, +0.1%), Intel Core i7-14650HX (41576, +0.2%), Intel Core i7-12850HX (41779, -0.3%), and Intel Core i7-14700T (41914, -0.6%). These deltas are all within a single percentage point, so the 251TE sits in a tightly clustered performance band. The i9-14900F, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX (60099, -0.2%), AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX (60104, -0.2%), AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D (59641, +0.6%), and Intel Xeon Gold 6338T (60572, -0.9%). The i9-14900F thus competes in a higher performance tier entirely.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and use the Intel Socket 1700 platform. The Core 7 251TE is a Bartlett Lake part, while the i9-14900F is a Raptor Lake-R part from the Core 14th Gen series, based on Raptor Lake architecture. Both have 24 cores and 32 threads, so thread count does not explain the performance delta.

The die size differs meaningfully. The Core 7 251TE measures 215 mm², while the i9-14900F measures 257 mm². The L2 cache also differs: the 251TE has 1.25 MB per core, whereas the i9-14900F has 2 MB per core. L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core, and L3 cache is identical at 36 MB shared. The larger L2 allocation on the i9-14900F likely contributes to its advantage in cache-sensitive workloads such as data compression and random string sorting.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Core 7 251TE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The i9-14900F has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The i9-14900F holds a 0.60 GHz base clock advantage and a 0.40 GHz boost clock advantage. The thermal design power differs as well: the 251TE is rated at 45 W, while the i9-14900F is rated at 65 W. The higher TDP on the i9-14900F allows for the higher sustained clock rates.

Memory support is the same in type, with both supporting DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The 251TE lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the i9-14900F does not have a recorded bandwidth figure in the database. Both support ECC memory. Both use PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

One notable difference is integrated graphics. The Core 7 251TE includes UHD Graphics 770, while the i9-14900F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A). This means the 251TE can drive a display without a discrete GPU, while the i9-14900F requires a separate graphics card. The release dates differ: the i9-14900F was released on 2024-01-07, and the 251TE followed on 2025-01-12. The launch MSRP for the 251TE is $384, while the i9-14900F has a launch MSRP of $524.

Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Both are listed as Active in production status and target the Desktop market segment. The part numbers are SRQAXQ5ZG for the 251TE and SRN3W for the i9-14900F.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a one-sided comparison. The Intel Core i9-14900F outperforms the Intel Core 7 251TE in every recorded test, with deltas ranging from -20.8% in single-thread PassMark to -45.4% in extended instructions. For workloads measured by Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the i9-14900F delivers roughly 55% higher scores across the board. For PassMark workloads, the advantage ranges from roughly 29% to 45%, depending on the test.

The Core 7 251TE does hold two structural advantages that are not reflected in compute benchmarks. It includes UHD Graphics 770, so it can operate without a discrete GPU. It also has a lower TDP of 45 W versus 65 W, which may be relevant for systems with stricter cooling or power budgets. The 251TE also carries a lower launch MSRP of $384 versus $524.

However, from a pure performance standpoint, the data shows no scenario where the 251TE takes the lead. Its average benchmark score of 41650 places it at the 88th percentile, while the i9-14900F's 60008 places it at the 92nd percentile. The i9-14900F's nearest rivals are all AMD Ryzen 9-class mobile HX parts or Xeon-class server chips, while the 251TE's nearest rivals are mid-range HX mobile parts and a T-series desktop chip. The performance class separation is clear.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: Both have identical counts: 24 cores and 32 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark extended instructions, where the i9-14900F scores 31084 versus 16974 for the 251TE, a delta of -45.4%.

Q: Does the Core 7 251TE have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes UHD Graphics 770. The i9-14900F has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Q: What are the boost clocks of each processor?

A: The Core 7 251TE boosts to 5.40 GHz, and the i9-14900F boosts to 5.80 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: Both have 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The Core 7 251TE averages 41650, and the i9-14900F averages 60008.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900F wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 39551 against 25518. In single-core R23, it scores 5583 against 3602. In PassMark multi-thread, it scores 46532 against 30022. In integer math, it scores 177066 against 125739. In floating-point math, it scores 119550 against 85607. In data compression, it scores 564207 against 334399. There is no measured workload where the Core 7 251TE closes the gap to a single-digit percentage, let alone takes the lead.

The Core 7 251TE nonetheless occupies a distinct position in the product stack. Its 45 W TDP is lower than the i9-14900F's 65 W, and it includes UHD Graphics 770, which the i9-14900F lacks entirely. For systems that require a built-in display output or that operate under tighter power constraints, the 251TE offers those capabilities, but the benchmark data does not show a compute-oriented use case where it wins. The 251TE's nearest rivals are within a 0.6% band (Core Ultra 7 265H at +0.1%, Core i7-14650HX at +0.2%, Core i7-12850HX at -0.3%, Core i7-14700T at -0.6%), so it performs in line with its direct peers. The i9-14900F, by contrast, trades margins within a 0.9% band against Ryzen 9 HX parts and a Xeon Gold chip. The two processors are simply not in the same performance tier.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 251TE | Intel Core i9-14900F |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-R |

| Architecture | Not listed | Raptor Lake |

| Generation | Core 7 (Bartlett Lake) | Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| Die Size | 215 mm² | 257 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | Not listed |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | N/A |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-01-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $384 | $524 |

| Part Number | SRQAXQ5ZG | SRN3W |

Shared specifications include 24 cores, 32 threads, 80 KB L1 per core, 36 MB shared L3 cache, DDR4/DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, Intel Socket 1700, 10 nm process node, Intel as foundry, locked multiplier, Active production status, and Desktop market segment.