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 i5-11400F review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£110PassMark multi-core score:16865N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:LGA1200TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i5-11400F Review: Compare 168 technical specifications, 15 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i5-11400F
7.0/10

Overall score

Score
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists, owners and ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 15%, Sentiment score 10%, User 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 57% of models
Score components

40%

6.5

Technical score

25%

8.6

Reviews score

15%

6.5

List score

10%

6.5

Sentiment score

10%

6.5

User score

▲Better than 57% of processors
7.9

Value for money

Value for money
7.9/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 78% of models
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

▲Better than 78%
6.5

Technical score

Technical score
6.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 60% of models
Score components

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

5.3

Architecture

10%

6.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 60%
8.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 96% of models

80%

8.5

Average grade

20%

9.0

Popularity

Grades by review (15)
5 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
★Better than 96%
6.5

User score

User score
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How happy buyers are with this model, based on ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Enough data: A model needs at least 1 rating from across the web. Without one, it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
Share: User score counts 10% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 65% of models

6.5

Mark 8.6 is below the typical mark 8.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

9.0

Rating

20%

7.3

Popularity

▼Worse than 65%
6.5

List score

List score
6.5/ 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 15% 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 (1)
List score: in 1 of 72 lists (1%)
▲Better than 88%
  • intel-core-i5-11400f
  • intel-core-i5-11400f
  • intel-core-i5-11400f
  • intel-core-i5-11400f
intel-core-i5-11400f
intel-core-i5-11400f
intel-core-i5-11400f
intel-core-i5-11400f
Best prices
*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.
Loading category ranking...

Processors model ranking

Ranked #129 of 558 models in Processors (Overall score)

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-11400F

Technical score
Technical score
6.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 60% of models
Score components:

60%

6.6

Performance

18%

5.3

Architecture

10%

6.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

6.5
Reviews score
8.6
User score
6.5
List score
6.5
Value for money
Value for money
7.9/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 78% of models
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

7.9
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
H470, Z490, W480, Q470, H510, B560, H570, Z590, Q570, W580
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, AVX2, AVX-512
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
16,865
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 16,865 in PassMark, which is higher than 62.1% 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
no
This processor does not include integrated graphics. 85.4% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
N/A
Integrated GPU execution units
N/A
Integrated GPU base frequency
N/A
Integrated media encoders/decoders
N/A
Show more
What reviewers say
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)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
?
Configurable TDP
?
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i5-11400F 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
  • 28.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.6/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 96% of models

    80%

    8.5

    Average grade

    20%

    9.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    5 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
    8.6 vs 6.7
  • 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.
  • 39.2% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,136 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,136 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
  • 47% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (16,865 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    16,865 vs 11,469
  • 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
  • 28.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.6/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 96% of models

    80%

    8.5

    Average grade

    20%

    9.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    5 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 4 estimated from the review. 10 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
    8.6 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
  • 39.2% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,136 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,136 vs 1,535
  • 47% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (16,865 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    16,865 vs 11,469
  • 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
  • 16.5% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,979 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,979 vs 2,558
  • 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
  • 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.
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, 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, 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, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 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
  • 16.7% lower list score
    List score
    6.5/ 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 15% 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 (1)
    List score: in 1 of 72 lists (1%)
    6.5 vs 7.8
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 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
  • 16.7% lower list score
    List score
    6.5/ 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 15% 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 (1)
    List score: in 1 of 72 lists (1%)
    6.5 vs 7.8
  • 11.0% lower user score
    User score
    6.5/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How happy buyers are with this model, based on ratings from across the web.
    How we count it
    Enough data: A model needs at least 1 rating from across the web. Without one, it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
    Share: User score counts 10% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 65% of models

    6.5

    Mark 8.6 is below the typical mark 8.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    9.0

    Rating

    20%

    7.3

    Popularity

    6.5 vs 7.3
  • 9.7% lower sentiment score
    6.5 vs 7.2
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, 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, 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, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 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
  • No integrated graphics
    This processor does not include integrated graphics, while the average processor does. 85.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
  • 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
Digital David
≈ estimated
25/12/2021
Hands-on review · installation and benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400F is a good-value 11th gen budget chip for gaming, though the non-F version is worth considering.
9.0
Digital Foundry
≈ estimated
05/06/2021
Benchmark review · gaming, memory and cooler tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400F is a strong gaming pick for its price, though productivity and future upgrades are weaker.
9.0
TechteamGB
≈ estimated
23/04/2021
Hands-on review · gaming benchmarks and price comparison
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400F is a strong value pick for gaming, though its locked multiplier and pricier motherboard are drawbacks.
9.5
DannyzReviews
≈ estimated
10/04/2021
Hands-on review · gaming tests and value comparison
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400F is excellent value for budget gamers and a clear pick over pricier six-core rivals.
9.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
10/04/2021
Hands-on review · gaming and application benchmarks
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400F is a top budget chip, especially on a B560 board, though its stock cooler falls short.
9.5
optimum
≈ estimated
08/04/2021
Benchmark review · gaming, power limits and cooling tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-11400F is the best-value gaming CPU right now, though it needs a better cooler and an unlocked power limit.
Overview video
Brand video
Not graded
Overview video
Overview video

What reviewers agree on

Based on 6 · 10

Reviewers praise its gaming performance and value, but dislike the power limits, locked overclocking and missing integrated graphics, while cooling divides opinion.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

10
guru3d.com
✓ explicit
16/04/2021
Lab test · Gaming processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400F is a six-core gaming chip for buyers who already have a graphics card, since it lacks built-in graphics and runs hot on 14nm.
9.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
14/04/2021
Lab test · Power limits
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400F beats its predecessor by up to 20% with power limits removed, but at a fixed 65W it drops to 2.8 to 3.3 GHz under load.
9.0
muycomputer.com
≈ estimated
12/09/2021
Full review · Gaming CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400F runs cool and fast at its 65W default, landing near the Core i5-11600K, but throttles once the power limit is lifted.
9.0
gameit.es
≈ estimated
28/05/2021
Benchmark test · Compact gaming
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400F is a good fit for compact gaming PCs, staying under 49°C in every test and offering enough power for most players.
8.0
bloghtpc.com
≈ estimated
01/06/2021
Lab test · Power and cooling
Verdict
The Intel Core i5-11400F trails the Ryzen 5 5600X but holds its own, though it draws far more power than its 65W rating suggests.

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i5-11400F

  • A cooler is included, so you can start building straight away.
  • Six cores and 12 threads handle multitasking well.
  • A base power of 65 W keeps heat moderate.
  • Boost up to 4.4 GHz speeds up single tasks.
  • PCIe 4.0 and DDR4 at 3200 MHz move data quickly.
  • AVX-512 instructions speed up some demanding workloads.

What we don't like about Intel Core i5-11400F

  • No integrated graphics, so a graphics card is required.
  • The 276 mm² die is large for this class of chip.
  • No unlocked multiplier, so the clock speed cannot be raised.
  • A 2.6 GHz base clock means the chip depends on boost for speed.

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-11400F comes with its own cooler in the box, which is uncommon for a chip at this level. It has six cores and 12 threads, with a boost up to 4.4 GHz, and its base power is 65 W, a modest figure that keeps heat under control. Its Geekbench 6 single-core score of 2136 is enough for everyday desktop tasks. PCIe 4.0 and DDR4 memory at 3200 MHz help data move quickly. The two drawbacks are die size and graphics. The die measures 276 mm², and it has no integrated graphics, so you need a graphics card. It also lacks an unlocked multiplier, so you cannot raise its clock speed. It suits a buyer who wants a simple desktop build and is already planning to add a graphics card.

Compare Intel Core i5-11400F 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 i5-11400F and other processors

No results found