OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i5-11400 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£160PassMark multi-core score:16664N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:LGA1200TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i5-11400 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 13 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i5-11400
6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 57% of models
Score components

40%

5.9

Technical score

25%

8.3

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

5.9

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 57% of processors
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 71% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

9.7

Price

â–²Better than 71%
5.9

Technical score

Technical score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 51% of models
Score components

60%

5.8

Performance

18%

5.4

Architecture

10%

6.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

6.6

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 51%
8.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 86% of models

80%

8.1

Average grade

20%

8.9

Popularity

Grades by review (13)
4 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 9 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 86%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • intel-core-i5-11400
  • intel-core-i5-11400
intel-core-i5-11400
intel-core-i5-11400
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i5-11400

Based on 4 · 11

Good value, easy to find and solid in games, but it runs warm and power limits hold it back.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the Intel Core i5-11400

Based on 137 owners sharing their experience in online comments

33%positive10%mixed57%negative

Owners value affordable, capable gaming performance, while recurring complaints center on disappointing frame rates, game crashes, and excessive heat.

What owners dislike

  • Frame rates can drop sharply or stutter in demanding games, especially in open-world titles with many NPCs, and some owners report falling to 30 to 60 fps.32
  • Temperatures can reach 85 to 100 °C under load with the stock cooler, and some owners need a better cooler or watercooling to keep them under control.20
  • Some games crash or fail to launch, with DirectX or driver errors in titles like Warzone, GTA V and Fortnite, especially on Windows 11.7
  • Some owners see the clock stuck at 2.6 GHz or dropping to about 3.2 GHz under load, often when temperatures rise.5
  • Owners report the integrated graphics do not work or show 0% usage in games, and some boards boot back into the BIOS when the discrete GPU is removed.5
  • Under load the chip can draw 95 to 100 W, well above its rated 65 W, and owners who raise power limits see the draw climb further.4
  • GPU usage can fall to 0% or stay around 40 to 50% in some games, which lowers frame rates even with a capable graphics card.3
  • Running one RAM stick in single channel causes big frame-rate drops in CPU-heavy games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Fortnite, and dual channel fixes much of it.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-11400

Technical score
Technical score
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 51% of models
Score components:

60%

5.8

Performance

18%

5.4

Architecture

10%

6.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.9

Platform

1%

6.6

Integrated graphics

5.9
Reviews score
8.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 71% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

9.7

Price

7.7
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1200
This processor uses the LGA1200 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.2% of processors.
Chipset
Z590, H570, B560, H510, Z490, H470, Q470, Q570, W480, W580
This processor supports Z590, H570, B560, H510, Z490, H470, Q470, Q570, W480, W580 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 64.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 47.7% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x2.6 GHz which is higher than that of 54.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
16,664
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 16,664 in PassMark, which is higher than 61.5% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
12 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
L2 cache
3 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 3 MB which is larger than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
L1 cache
480 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 480 KB which is larger than that of 60.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.1% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 730
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 730 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 54.4% of processors and equal to that in 2.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 65 W which is higher than that of 68% of processors and equal to that of 17% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
65 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 65 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 17.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
154 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 154 W which is higher than that of 82.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.3% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i5-11400 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 40.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,153 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,153 vs 1,535
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • 23.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 86% of models

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    8.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (13)
    4 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 9 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.3 vs 6.7
  • 45.3% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (16,664 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    16,664 vs 11,469
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 23.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 86% of models

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    8.9

    Popularity

    Grades by review (13)
    4 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 9 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.3 vs 6.7
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1200 vs FP5).
    LGA1200 vs FP5
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 40.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,153 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,153 vs 1,535
  • 45.3% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (16,664 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    16,664 vs 11,469
  • 39.1% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,244 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,244 vs 5,209
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 38.6% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (3,888 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    3,888 vs 2,804.5
  • 16.7% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,986 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,986 vs 2,558
  • 11.2% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (545 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    545 vs 490
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 2.41x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (154 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    154 W vs 64 W
  • 55.9% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (276 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    276 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 57.6% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (144.1 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    144.07 vs 340.075
  • 18.1% lower sentiment score
    5.9 vs 7.2
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 57.6% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (144.1 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    144.07 vs 340.075
  • 55.9% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (276 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    276 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 2.41x higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (154 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    154 W vs 64 W
  • 44.4% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W
  • 44.4% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    65 W vs 45 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Proceu Tech
≈ estimated
24/09/2021
Hands-on review · gaming and productivity tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400 is a budget gaming chip with good value, though it trails Ryzen 5 and needs a better cooler.
9.0
Tech Profis
≈ estimated
26/05/2021
Build and benchmark · budget gaming PC with RTX 3070
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400 is a strong budget choice, though slower than the Ryzen 5 5600X in most tests.
9.0
Hardware Canucks
≈ estimated
20/04/2021
Full review · benchmarks, power, gaming and memory tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400 is a great CPU at Intel's defaults, but motherboard auto settings inflate its results.
9.5
Elevated Systems
≈ estimated
18/04/2021
Hands-on review · benchmarks and GPU scaling
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400 is the best price-to-performance gaming CPU today, though heavier 3D content creation needs more cores.
6.0
RandomGaminginHD
≈ estimated
18/04/2021
Budget build test · gaming, productivity and integrated graphics
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400 is a useful upgrade for productivity and budget boards, but not worth it over the i5-10400 for gaming.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
tomshardware.com
✓ explicit
16/05/2021
Benchmark test · Entry-level gaming
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400 is the stronger entry-level gaming chip, beating the aging Ryzen 5 3600 in games, though it draws more power under load.
6.0
hardwarecanucks.com
✓ explicit
20/04/2021
Hands-on test · Power limits
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400 is quick for its class, but motherboard default power settings push it to 120W and strain the stock cooler.
9.0
tuttotech.net
≈ estimated
12/05/2021
Benchmark test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400 suits builds without a graphics card, since its built-in graphics run Valorant and CS:GO at medium detail, but unlocked power needs a better cooler.
9.0
tweakers.net
≈ estimated
04/04/2021
Benchmark test · Desktop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400 beats the Ryzen 5 3600 in single-core work and adds built-in graphics, though it draws more power and trails in some rendering tasks.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i5-11400

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio, often cited as one of the best budget values in its generation
  • Strong gaming performance, especially for 1080p and 1440p mid-range builds
  • Support for PCIe 4.0, enabling faster connectivity for modern GPUs and NVMe SSDs
  • Significant single-threaded performance gains over the previous 10th generation
  • Integrated graphics (UHD 730) are useful for troubleshooting or casual productivity without a dedicated GPU
  • Improved multi-threaded performance when motherboard power limits are removed

What customers don't like about Intel Core i5-11400

  • Included stock cooler is frequently reported as loud and insufficient for high thermal loads
  • High power consumption and heat generation when power limits are unlocked by motherboards
  • Locked multiplier means traditional overclocking is not supported
  • Integrated graphics (UHD 730) are weaker than the UHD 750 found in higher-end 11th Gen models
  • Performance is surpassed by newer 12th Gen (Alder Lake) and 13th Gen processors in a similar price bracket
  • Requires a 500-series motherboard (like B560 or H570) to take full advantage of memory overclocking and PCIe 4.0

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-11400 is an 11th Gen Rocket Lake desktop processor featuring 6 cores and 12 threads with a 2.6 GHz base frequency and a max turbo boost of 4.4 GHz. Built on a 14nm process for the LGA 1200 socket, it includes 12 MB of Intel Smart Cache, a 65W TDP, and integrated Intel UHD Graphics 730. Its main advantages include support for PCIe 4.0, compatibility with DDR4-3200 memory, and strong value-oriented performance for gaming and productivity that often matches more expensive older i7 models. However, it lacks an unlocked multiplier for traditional CPU overclocking and can exhibit high power consumption and thermal output when motherboard power limits are removed to maintain peak boost speeds.

Compare Intel Core i5-11400 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i5-11400 and other processors

No results found