i9-13900K vs Celeron 6305

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 6305
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.31
Core i9-13900K
2022
24 cores / 32 threads, 125 Watt
37.09
+2731%

Core i9-13900K outperforms Celeron 6305 by a whopping 2731% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking227688
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data62.98
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Tiger LakeIntel Core i9
Power efficiency8.2628.08
Architecture codenameTiger Lake-U (2020)Raptor Lake, Raptor Cove, Gracemont (2022)
Release date1 September 2020 (4 years ago)27 September 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$589

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Performance-coresno data8
Efficient-coresno data16
Threads232
Base clock speedno data3 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz5.7 GHz
Bus rate4 GT/s4 × 16 GT/s
Multiplierno data30
L1 cache160 KB80K (per core)
L2 cache2.5 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm SuperFinIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketFCBGA1449FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shift++
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
Idle States++
Thermal Monitoring++
SIPP-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost++

Security technologies

Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
SGX-no data
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K are enumerated here.

VT-d++
VT-x++
EPT++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory size64 GB192 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data89.604 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel ProcessorsIntel UHD Graphics 770
Quick Sync Video++
Clear Video HD++
Graphics max frequency1.25 GHz1.65 GHz
Execution Units4832

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported44

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@60Hz4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hz5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort7680x4320@60Hz7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12.112
OpenGL4.64.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K.

PCIe versionno data5.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron 6305 1.31
i9-13900K 37.09
+2731%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron 6305 2080
i9-13900K 58917
+2733%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron 6305 749
i9-13900K 3001
+301%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron 6305 1264
i9-13900K 20183
+1497%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron 6305 3465
i9-13900K 12018
+247%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron 6305 6611
i9-13900K 87738
+1227%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron 6305 39.12
i9-13900K 2.05
+1808%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron 6305 2
i9-13900K 68
+3397%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron 6305 161
i9-13900K 5806
+3505%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Celeron 6305 84
i9-13900K 318
+279%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Celeron 6305 0.99
i9-13900K 3.87
+291%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron 6305 0.9
i9-13900K 22.9
+2389%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron 6305 1210
i9-13900K 14271
+1079%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Celeron 6305 11
i9-13900K 265
+2253%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Celeron 6305 62
i9-13900K 419
+577%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Celeron 6305 1198
i9-13900K 24033
+1906%

Blender(-)

Celeron 6305 2834
+3274%
i9-13900K 84

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Celeron 6305 638
i9-13900K 2286
+258%

7-Zip Single

Celeron 6305 2238
i9-13900K 7272
+225%

7-Zip

Celeron 6305 4263
i9-13900K 146984
+3348%

WebXPRT 3

Celeron 6305 101
i9-13900K 368
+265%

CrossMark Overall

Celeron 6305 508
i9-13900K 2580
+408%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.31 37.09
Integrated graphics card 5.59 6.16
Recency 1 September 2020 27 September 2022
Physical cores 2 24
Threads 2 32
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron 6305 has 733.3% lower power consumption.

i9-13900K, on the other hand, has a 2731.3% higher aggregate performance score, 10.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, and 1100% more physical cores and 1500% more threads.

The Core i9-13900K is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 6305 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 6305 is a notebook processor while Core i9-13900K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 6305 and Core i9-13900K, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron 6305
Celeron 6305
Intel Core i9-13900K
Core i9-13900K

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 153 votes

Rate Celeron 6305 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 1965 votes

Rate Core i9-13900K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 6305 or Core i9-13900K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.