Intel Core i3-14100F vs Intel Core i9-14901E Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i3-14100F has 4 cores and 8 threads. This gives the i9-14901E double the core count and double the thread count.

Q: How do their boost clocks compare?

A: The i9-14901E boosts up to 5.60 GHz, while the i3-14100F boosts up to 4.70 GHz. The i9-14901E holds a 0.90 GHz advantage in maximum boost frequency.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The i9-14901E has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, three times the 12 MB shared L3 cache of the i3-14100F. The i9-14901E also has 2 MB of L2 cache per core, compared to 1.25 MB per core on the i3-14100F.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i3-14100F and the Intel Core i9-14901E support ECC memory. Both also support DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The i9-14901E includes Intel UHD Graphics 770, while the i3-14100F has no integrated graphics (N/A). This is a significant feature difference for systems that do not use a discrete GPU.

Q: How do the processors rank against all CPUs in the database?

A: The i9-14901E has a percentile rank of 86, placing it above the i3-14100F, which ranks at percentile 72. The average benchmark score for the i9-14901E is 37911, while the i3-14100F averages 18519.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Intel Core 14th Gen series and share the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. Both are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and use the Intel Socket 1700. The foundry is Intel for both units. The die sizes differ substantially: the i3-14100F measures 163 mm², while the i9-14901E measures 257 mm², reflecting the larger core and cache configuration of the i9 part.

The fundamental architectural difference lies in resource scaling. The i3-14100F provides 4 cores and 8 threads, whereas the i9-14901E doubles that to 8 cores and 16 threads. L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core for both, but L2 cache per core is larger on the i9-14901E at 2 MB versus 1.25 MB. The L3 cache difference is stark: 12 MB shared on the i3-14100F against 36 MB shared on the i9-14901E. A larger last-level cache directly benefits workloads with repetitive data access patterns, such as compression and encryption.

The integrated graphics situation separates the two. The i3-14100F has no iGPU, which means a discrete graphics card is mandatory for display output. The i9-14901E ships with UHD Graphics 770, allowing basic display and media acceleration without a separate GPU. Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, and both expose Gen 5 PCIe with 16 lanes from the CPU. ECC memory support is present on both.

The release dates differ: the i3-14100F launched on 2024-01-07, while the i9-14901E launched later on 2024-06-30. The i3-14100F has a launch MSRP of $109. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The part numbers are SRMX2 for the i3-14100F and Q49ESRNJH for the i9-14901E.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clean sweep: the i9-14901E wins every single head-to-head test in the database. The i3-14100F does not record a single win across any of the 17 compared benchmarks. That said, the magnitude of the i9-14901E advantage varies by workload, which matters for use-case analysis.

For single-threaded tasks, the i9-14901E wins by a relatively modest margin. The passmark single-thread score is 4354 versus 3778, a delta of 13.2%. This indicates that in lightly threaded applications, the i9-14901E is faster but not overwhelmingly so. The i3-14100F remains reasonably competitive in per-core performance, though the i9-14901E still leads.

For multi-threaded and parallel workloads, the i9-14901E dominates. Cinebench R23 multicore shows 25753 for the i9-14901E against 13084 for the i3-14100F. Passmark multithread shows 30298 versus 15420. The i9-14901E also crushes the i3-14100F in floating-point math (81089 vs 35370), integer math (112736 vs 45357), and physics (3041 vs 1077). These are workloads that scale with core count, cache capacity, and memory bandwidth, all of which favor the i9-14901E.

The i3-14100F is best suited to basic desktop use, light productivity, and tasks that rely primarily on single-core performance. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration and 12 MB L3 cache can handle everyday computing, but the data shows it falls far behind in heavy parallel processing. The i9-14901E is the clear choice for rendering, scientific computing, data compression, encryption, and any workload that can use more than 8 threads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. Core count is 4 for the i3-14100F versus 8 for the i9-14901E. Thread count is 8 versus 16. Base clock is 3.50 GHz for the i3-14100F and 2.80 GHz for the i9-14901E, meaning the i3-14100F actually starts at a higher base frequency. Boost clock reverses the situation: 4.70 GHz on the i3-14100F versus 5.60 GHz on the i9-14901E.

TDP differs, with the i3-14100F rated at 58 W and the i9-14901E at 65 W. Die size is 163 mm² for the i3-14100F and 257 mm² for the i9-14901E. L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB on the i3-14100F and 2 MB on the i9-14901E. L3 cache is 12 MB shared versus 36 MB shared. Integrated graphics is N/A on the i3-14100F and UHD Graphics 770 on the i9-14901E.

Both share the same socket, architecture, process node, foundry, memory support, memory bus, ECC support, PCIe generation and lane count, market segment, production status, and unlocked multiplier status. The i3-14100F has a launch MSRP of $109; the i9-14901E has no recorded launch MSRP. Release dates differ, with the i3-14100F releasing earlier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. Every benchmark in the database shows the i9-14901E ahead of the i3-14100F. The smallest margin is in single-threaded performance. Passmark single-thread scores 4354 for the i9-14901E against 3778 for the i3-14100F, a delta of 13.2%. The same delta appears in the duplicate passmark_singlethread entry.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent deltas of 49.2% in favor of the i9-14901E across all four tests. Cinebench R15 multicore is 2595 versus 1318, R15 singlecore is 366 versus 186, R20 multicore is 10816 versus 5495, R20 singlecore is 1526 versus 775, R23 multicore is 25753 versus 13084, and R23 singlecore is 3635 versus 1847. The uniform delta across single and multi-core versions suggests the i9-14901E's advantage comes from both higher per-core efficiency and additional cores.

The Passmark suite reveals where the gap widens most. Data encryption shows the i9-14901E at 18571 versus 8922, a delta of 52%. Integer math is 112736 versus 45357, a 59.8% delta. Floating-point math is 81089 versus 35370, a 56.4% delta. Random string sorting is 39138 versus 17596, a 55% delta. Physics is 3041 versus 1077, a 64.6% delta. The largest delta in the entire comparison is in prime number finding: 189 versus 61, a 67.7% delta.

Data compression shows a delta of 39%, with scores of 288777 versus 176106. Extended instructions show a delta of 30.5%, with 17249 versus 11984. Passmark multithread shows 30298 versus 15420, a 49.1% delta. In every case, the i9-14901E delivers more than double the performance in heavy parallel workloads, and in several cases nearly triple.

The average benchmark score difference reinforces the pattern. The i9-14901E averages 37911, while the i3-14100F averages 18519. The percentile ranks, 86 versus 72, place them in different performance tiers entirely. The nearest rivals for each confirm their separate positions: the i3-14100F sits near the Intel Core i5-13420H and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE, while the i9-14901E sits near the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and AMD Ryzen 7 9700X.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward conclusion. The Intel Core i9-14901E outperforms the Intel Core i3-14100F in every benchmark recorded in the database. For users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput, the i9-14901E is the only rational choice between these two. Its 8 cores, 16 threads, 36 MB L3 cache, and higher boost clock deliver decisive wins in rendering, encryption, compression, physics, and math-heavy workloads. The i9-14901E also includes integrated graphics, making it more flexible for systems without a discrete GPU.

The i3-14100F remains a viable option for scenarios where its lower TDP of 58 W, smaller die size, and lower launch MSRP of $109 are priorities. Its single-threaded performance is respectable, trailing the i9-14901E by only 13.2% in Passmark single-thread. For basic desktop workloads, office productivity, and light multitasking, the i3-14100F provides adequate performance while consuming less power. The higher base clock of 3.50 GHz means it does not sacrifice responsiveness at idle or in lightly threaded tasks.

However, the benchmark data shows that any workload that scales beyond 4 cores will favor the i9-14901E by a wide margin. The smallest multi-threaded delta is 39% in data compression, and most multi-threaded deltas exceed 49%. The i3-14100F cannot match the i9-14901E in any parallel application. Users who run video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific simulations, or database workloads should select the i9-14901E without hesitation based on this data. Users who prioritize lower power consumption and a lower launch price, and who do not need heavy multi-threading, can consider the i3-14100F.