i7-13700F vs Celeron 925

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 925
2011
35 Watt
0.30
Core i7-13700F
2023
16 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
24.53
+8077%

Core i7-13700F outperforms Celeron 925 by a whopping 8077% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3100204
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data54.18
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.8135.71
Architecture codenameno dataRaptor Lake-S (2023−2024)
Release date1 January 2011 (13 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$359

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F 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 coresno data16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threadsno data24
Base clock speed2.3 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speedno data5.2 GHz
L1 cacheno data80K (per core)
L2 cacheno data2 MB (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-+
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x-+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5-5600, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data192 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data89.6 GB/s

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F.

PCIe versionno data5.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 925 0.30
i7-13700F 24.53
+8077%

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 925 477
i7-13700F 38971
+8070%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 24.53
Recency 1 January 2011 4 January 2023
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron 925 has 85.7% lower power consumption.

i7-13700F, on the other hand, has a 8076.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 12 years.

The Core i7-13700F is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 925 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron 925 is a notebook processor while Core i7-13700F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 925 and Core i7-13700F, 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 925
Celeron 925
Intel Core i7-13700F
Core i7-13700F

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 925 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 492 votes

Rate Core i7-13700F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 925 or Core i7-13700F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.