Intel Core i9-14900F vs Intel Core i9-14901KE Comparison

Intel Core i9-14900F vs Intel Core i9-14901KE

The Intel Core i9-14900F and the Intel Core i9-14901KE share the same Raptor Lake architecture, the same 10 nm process node, the same 257 mm² die size, and the same Intel Socket 1700, yet the recorded data shows two distinctly different processors. The i9-14900F is a 24-core, 32-thread part with a 2.00 GHz base clock, a 5.80 GHz boost clock, a 65 W TDP, and a 92nd percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database. The i9-14901KE is an 8-core, 16-thread part with a 3.80 GHz base clock, a 5.80 GHz boost clock, a 125 W TDP, and a 50th percentile ranking. The i9-14900F has an average benchmark score of 60008, while the i9-14901KE has no recorded benchmark scores, resulting in an average benchmark score of zero. This absence of measured performance data for the i9-14901KE is the defining factor in any comparison, as the database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results and no wins for either processor. The analysis below relies entirely on the recorded specifications and the benchmark data that exists for the i9-14900F.

FAQ

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900F has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core i9-14901KE has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds?

A: The i9-14900F has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The i9-14901KE has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. Both processors reach the same maximum boost frequency.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. Both also support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i9-14900F has a TDP of 65 watts, while the i9-14901KE has a TDP of 125 watts.

Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?

A: The i9-14900F has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A. The i9-14901KE includes UHD Graphics 770.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: The i9-14900F has a locked multiplier, so it is not unlocked. The i9-14901KE has an unlocked multiplier.

Q: What is the recorded average benchmark score for each?

A: The i9-14900F has an average benchmark score of 60008. The i9-14901KE has an average benchmark score of 0, with its percentile ranking at 50.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear choice for workloads that require multi-threaded throughput: the Intel Core i9-14900F. Its 24 cores and 32 threads, combined with an average benchmark score of 60008 and a 92nd percentile ranking, place it far ahead of the i9-14901KE in the database records. The i9-14901KE, with 8 cores and 16 threads, has no benchmark scores recorded, which means the database can only verify its specifications, not its performance. For any application that relies on parallel processing, the i9-14900F is the only option with measurable evidence of capability.

The i9-14901KE does present a different set of attributes. Its 3.80 GHz base clock is substantially higher than the i9-14900F's 2.00 GHz base clock, which suggests stronger single-thread performance on paper, though no benchmark data confirms this. It also includes UHD Graphics 770, whereas the i9-14900F has no integrated graphics. The i9-14901KE has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the i9-14900F is locked. These differences make the i9-14901KE a candidate for users who need integrated graphics, a higher base clock, and overclocking flexibility, but the lack of any recorded benchmark scores means its actual performance cannot be verified against the i9-14900F in this database.

The i9-14900F also holds the advantage in production status, release timing, and market positioning. It was released on 2024-01-07, while the i9-14901KE was released on 2024-06-30. The i9-14900F has a launch MSRP of $524, while the i9-14901KE has no launch MSRP recorded. The i9-14900F is marked as Active in production status, as is the i9-14901KE. The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the i9-14900F is the processor with proven performance, and the i9-14901KE is a specification-only entry with no measured results to compare.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database lists no head-to-head benchmark results for these two processors, and the wins count for each is zero. The i9-14901KE has an empty benchmarks array, meaning no Cinebench, Geekbench, or PassMark scores are available for it. The i9-14900F, in contrast, has a full suite of benchmark scores across multiple tests.

In Cinebench R23, the i9-14900F records a multicore score of 39551 and a singlecore score of 5583. In Cinebench R20, it records a multicore score of 16611 and a singlecore score of 2344. In Cinebench R15, it records a multicore score of 3986 and a singlecore score of 562. These scores establish a performance baseline for the i9-14900F, but there are no corresponding numbers for the i9-14901KE to compare against.

Geekbench results for the i9-14900F show a multicore score of 20008 and a singlecore score of 2570. PassMark results cover a wide range of workloads: multithread score of 46532, single thread score of 4506, integer math score of 177066, floating point math score of 119550, data encryption score of 34644, data compression score of 564207, extended instructions score of 31084, find prime numbers score of 209, random string sorting score of 63728, and physics score of 2899. Each of these numbers represents a measured result for the i9-14900F, while the i9-14901KE has no equivalent data.

The nearest rivals for the i9-14900F in the database provide context for its performance. The AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX has an average score of 60099, which is 0.2 percent higher than the i9-14900F's 60008. The AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX has an average score of 60104, also 0.2 percent higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D has an average score of 59641, which is 0.6 percent lower. The Intel Xeon Gold 6338T has an average score of 60572, which is 0.9 percent higher. These deltas show the i9-14900F sitting within a single percentage point of several high-end rivals, but no such comparison exists for the i9-14901KE, which has no nearest rivals listed.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The i9-14900F has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the i9-14901KE has 8 cores and 16 threads. The base clock differs significantly: the i9-14900F runs at 2.00 GHz, and the i9-14901KE runs at 3.80 GHz. Both share a boost clock of 5.80 GHz. The TDP also differs: the i9-14900F is rated at 65 watts, and the i9-14901KE is rated at 125 watts.

The integrated graphics situation is different. The i9-14900F lists integrated graphics as N/A, meaning it has none. The i9-14901KE includes UHD Graphics 770. The multiplier status differs as well: the i9-14900F is not unlocked, while the i9-14901KE is unlocked. The part numbers are distinct, with the i9-14900F using SRN3W and the i9-14901KE using Q49DSRNJC.

The release dates differ, with the i9-14900F released on 2024-01-07 and the i9-14901KE released on 2024-06-30. The launch MSRP field shows $524 for the i9-14900F and no value for the i9-14901KE. The percentile rankings differ sharply: the i9-14900F sits at the 92nd percentile against all CPUs, while the i9-14901KE sits at the 50th percentile. The average benchmark scores differ as well, with 60008 for the i9-14900F and 0 for the i9-14901KE.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, with the codename Raptor Lake-R and the generation listed as Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh). Both use a 10 nm process node from Intel, and both have a die size of 257 mm². The cache structure is identical in the recorded data: 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. No transistor count is recorded for either processor, and no total L3 or vCache 3D data is present.

The memory support is the same for both: DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel, with ECC support. The PCIe configuration is also the same: Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The market segment for both is Desktop, and both are Active in production status. The foundry is Intel for both.

The key architectural difference lies in the core configuration. The i9-14900F uses 24 cores and 32 threads, which indicates a mix of performance and efficiency cores common in the Raptor Lake lineup, though the exact core composition is not specified in the data. The i9-14901KE uses 8 cores and 16 threads, which suggests a uniform core arrangement, though again the specific breakdown is not recorded. The i9-14901KE also includes UHD Graphics 770, which is an integrated graphics feature that the i9-14900F lacks. The unlocked multiplier on the i9-14901KE indicates it is designed for overclocking, while the locked multiplier on the i9-14900F means it is not.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-14900F wins in every measurable performance category because it is the only processor with recorded benchmark scores. Its 24 cores and 32 threads give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded workloads such as rendering, video encoding, and scientific computing. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 39551, the Geekbench multicore score of 20008, and the PassMark multithread score of 46532 all reflect this strength. Its PassMark integer math score of 177066 and floating point math score of 119550 show strong computational throughput. Its data compression score of 564207 and data encryption score of 34644 indicate solid performance in data-intensive tasks. Its 92nd percentile ranking confirms it sits near the top of the database's CPU list.

The i9-14901KE wins in areas that are not measured by benchmarks in the database. Its 3.80 GHz base clock is 1.80 GHz higher than the i9-14900F's 2.00 GHz base clock, which means it likely delivers faster single-thread responsiveness in lightly threaded tasks, though no recorded score verifies this. Its integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides a display output capability that the i9-14900F entirely lacks, making it suitable for systems without a discrete graphics card. Its unlocked multiplier allows user-controlled overclocking, which the i9-14900F does not permit. Its 125 W TDP, while higher, suggests it is designed to sustain higher clocks under load, though again the database has no scores to confirm actual performance.

For users building a high-performance desktop focused on multi-core productivity, the i9-14900F is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users who need integrated graphics, a higher base clock, or overclocking support, the i9-14901KE offers those specifications, but its performance remains unverified in this database. The data does not support a performance comparison beyond the specifications, because the i9-14901KE has no benchmark results. The i9-14900F, with its extensive benchmark suite and high percentile ranking, is the only processor in this pair with proven performance in the database.