Intel Core i9-14900K vs Intel Core i9-14900KS Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core i9-14900KS, which wins 18 of the 19 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The single exception, however, is striking: the Intel Core i9-14900K wins Cinebench R15 multicore with a score of 6103 against 5140, a 15.8% margin. This is the only test where the non-KS part leads, and it stands as an outlier against the broader pattern of results.

The most dramatic differences appear in single-core workloads. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, the 14900KS scores 725 versus 324.5 for the 14900K, a 123.4% advantage. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows an even larger gap: 7199 versus 2262.5, a 218.2% delta. These are not incremental improvements; they indicate a fundamentally different performance envelope in lightly threaded tasks. Geekbench singlecore confirms the trend, with the 14900KS ahead by 1.4% (2692 versus 2655), though the margin here is far more modest.

In multicore workloads, the 14900KS generally leads, though the margins vary widely. Cinebench R23 multicore shows the 14900KS at 50995 versus 39399.5, a 29.4% gain. Geekbench multicore gives the 14900KS a 10.3% edge (23931 versus 21697). Cinebench R20 multicore is closer, with the 14900KS ahead by 3% (21417 versus 20793). The PassMark multithread test shows a 2.3% advantage for the 14900KS (60012 versus 58674).

The PassMark suite offers a granular look at specialized workloads. The 14900KS leads in every recorded PassMark test. Data compression shows 803368 versus 792694, a 1.3% gain. Data encryption is 47717 versus 46813, a 1.9% edge. Extended instructions are nearly tied at 45524 versus 45154, a 0.8% lead. Find prime numbers favors the 14900KS by 5.6% (244 versus 231). Floating point math is 153975 versus 152975, a 0.7% margin. Integer math is 212644 versus 210622, a 1% gap. Physics shows a more substantial 7.7% lead for the 14900KS (3381 versus 3140). Random string sorting is 89789 versus 86971, a 3.2% edge. Single-thread PassMark tests show 4815 versus 4697, a 2.5% advantage.

The average benchmark score for the 14900KS is 81127, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The 14900K averages 79097, in the 95th percentile. The nearest rivals to the 14900KS include the Intel Xeon w5-3535X at 81115 (0% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX at 81103 (0% delta). The 14900K's closest competitors are the Intel Core i9-14900KF at 79371 (-0.3%) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus at 79574 (-0.6%).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KS has a boost clock of 6.20 GHz, while the Intel Core i9-14900K boosts to 6.00 GHz. Both share a base clock of 3.20 GHz.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Cinebench R23 singlecore?

A: The 14900KS scores 7199 versus 2262.5 for the 14900K, a 218.2% advantage. This is the largest single-core delta recorded between the two parts.

Q: Are the cache configurations identical?

A: Yes. Both processors have 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The 14900KS averages 81127, while the 14900K averages 79097. The 14900KS sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, one point above the 14900K's 95th percentile.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Both the Intel Core i9-14900KS and the Intel Core i9-14900K support ECC memory. They also share the same dual-channel memory bus and support both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: How do the two compare in PassMark physics performance?

A: The 14900KS scores 3381, which is 7.7% higher than the 14900K's 3140. This is one of the larger percentage wins for the KS variant outside of single-core tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-14900KS is the clear choice for single-core intensive applications. Its Cinebench R15 singlecore score of 725 and Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 7199 dwarf the 14900K's results. For workloads that depend on one or a few threads, such as legacy software, certain simulation tools, or lightly threaded games, the data shows a substantial advantage for the KS part. The 123.4% and 218.2% deltas are not subtle; they represent a step-change in single-thread capability.

The 14900KS also dominates in most multicore scenarios. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 29.4% lead, and Geekbench multicore a 10.3% lead. Content creation, 3D rendering, and compilation workloads that scale across cores will see meaningful gains. The PassMark physics test, which often reflects real-world gaming physics calculations, favors the 14900KS by 7.7%. Data compression and encryption also trend toward the KS part, with gains of 1.3% and 1.9% respectively.

The one place where the Intel Core i9-14900K wins is Cinebench R15 multicore, where it scores 6103 versus 5140 for the 14900KS, a 15.8% margin. This older benchmark does not align with the other multicore results, but for anyone specifically targeting Cinebench R15 multicore performance, the 14900K holds an edge. Outside of that single test, the 14900K trails in every other recorded measurement.

For users who prioritize raw single-thread speed or the best multicore throughput in modern benchmarks, the 14900KS is the superior part. The 14900K remains relevant only for the niche case of Cinebench R15 multicore or for those who want nearly identical performance in several PassMark workloads, such as floating point math (0.7% delta) and extended instructions (0.8% delta), where the differences are negligible.

Specification Differences

The two processors share a substantial number of specifications, but a few fields differ. The most obvious is the boost clock: the 14900KS reaches 6.20 GHz, while the 14900K reaches 6.00 GHz. The base clock is identical at 3.20 GHz.

Thermal design power differs as well. The 14900KS has a TDP of 150, while the 14900K has a TDP of 125. This higher TDP for the KS part aligns with its higher boost clock and likely reflects the additional power required to sustain those frequencies.

The launch MSRP also differs. The 14900KS launched at an MSRP of $689, while the 14900K launched at $589. This is the only pricing information in the data, and no further cost analysis is provided.

Release dates are different: the 14900KS was released on 2024-03-13, and the 14900K on 2023-10-16. The part numbers also differ, with the 14900KS listed as SRN7R and the 14900K as SRN48.

All other recorded specifications are identical. Both have 24 cores and 32 threads, a 10 nm process node from Intel, a die size of 257 mm², and the same cache hierarchy. Both use the Intel Socket 1700, support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, offer PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), and integrate UHD Graphics 770. Both have an unlocked multiplier, belong to the Core 14th Gen series, and use the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename.

Architecture Differences

At the architectural level, the two processors are nearly indistinguishable. Both are built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename, and both use the same 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The die size is identical at 257 mm².

The core and cache configuration is the same: 24 cores, 32 threads, 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither processor features a 3D V-Cache, and the total L3 cache field is left unspecified.

Both processors belong to the same generation, listed as Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh), and both are classified as Desktop market segment parts with Active production status. They share the same integrated graphics, UHD Graphics 770, and the same memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus.

The only architectural differences that can be inferred from the data are the boost clock and TDP, which are specification-level rather than architectural redesigns. The 14900KS's 6.20 GHz boost clock versus the 14900K's 6.00 GHz represents a higher frequency bin, likely enabled by the increased TDP of 150 versus 125. There is no evidence of a different core layout, cache structure, or process improvement.

In practical terms, the 14900KS appears to be a higher-binned version of the same silicon, with the same physical design but a more aggressive frequency curve. The benchmark results, particularly the massive single-core advantages, are consistent with a part that sustains higher clocks under single-thread loads.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i9-14900KS as the stronger processor in nearly every measurable way. It wins 18 of 19 head-to-head benchmarks, with the single loss being Cinebench R15 multicore. For users who need the best single-core performance, the 14900KS is unequivocally the choice, with a 218.2% lead in Cinebench R23 singlecore and a 123.4% lead in Cinebench R15 singlecore. These are not marginal gains; they are transformative for lightly threaded workloads.

For multicore tasks, the 14900KS also leads in the most demanding modern tests. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 29.4% advantage, and Geekbench multicore a 10.3% advantage. The higher TDP of 150 versus 125 likely supports these sustained multicore gains.

The 14900K is only preferable in the narrow case of Cinebench R15 multicore, where it leads by 15.8%. It also offers a lower launch MSRP of $589 compared to $689, but the performance data shows the 14900KS at a higher average benchmark score (81127 versus 79097) and a higher percentile (96th versus 95th).

Given the overwhelming benchmark evidence, the Intel Core i9-14900KS is the recommended part for anyone seeking maximum performance from this architecture. The 14900K remains a capable alternative, but the recorded data shows it trailing in almost every workload category. For single-core dominance and superior multicore throughput in modern benchmarks, the 14900KS is the clear winner.