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 i7-11700F review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£270PassMark multi-core score:20748N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.9 GHzCPU socket:LGA1200TDP (Thermal design power):65 W

Intel Core i7-11700F Review: Compare 168 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

Intel Core i7-11700F
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 58% of models
Score components

40%

6.9

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

15%

?

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

10%

6.9

Sentiment score

10%

6.9

User score

â–²Better than 58% 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 67% of models
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

â–²Better than 67%
6.9

Technical score

Technical score
6.9/ 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 66% of models
Score components

60%

7.2

Performance

18%

5.5

Architecture

10%

6.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.5

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 66%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
No expert tests yet
6.9

User score

User score
6.9/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models

6.9

Mark 8.7 is below the typical mark 8.8 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.8

Rating

20%

8.3

Popularity

â–¼Worse than 62%
?

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 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 (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-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
  • intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
intel-core-i7-11700f
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...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i7-11700F

Technical score
Technical score
6.9/ 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 66% of models
Score components:

60%

7.2

Performance

18%

5.5

Architecture

10%

6.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.5

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

4.0

Integrated graphics

6.9
Reviews score
7.2
User score
6.9
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 67% of models
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

9.1

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
H510, B560, H570, Q570, W580, Z590, Q470, H470, W480, Z490
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
?
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.9 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.9 GHz which is higher than that of 73.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.5 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.5 GHz which is higher than that of 64.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
20,748
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 20,748 in PassMark, which is higher than 71.3% of processors.
Show more
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
16 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 16 MB which is larger than that of 62% of processors and equal to that of 12.6% of processors.
L2 cache
4 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L1 cache
640 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 640 KB which is larger than that of 73.6% of processors and equal to that of 3.1% 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
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
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)
56 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 56 seconds which is shorter than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 3.9% of processors.
Configurable TDP
?
Show more

Intel Core i7-11700F vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 80.9% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (20,748 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    20,748 vs 11,469
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 56.7% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,162 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,162 vs 5,209
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Includes a cooler
    This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
  • 39.7% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,144 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,144 vs 1,535
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1200 vs FP5).
    LGA1200 vs FP5
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 80.9% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (20,748 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    20,748 vs 11,469
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 56.7% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,162 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,162 vs 5,209
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 39.7% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,144 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,144 vs 1,535
  • 27.1% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,252 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,252 vs 2,558
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x2.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 66.7% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (640 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    640 KB vs 384 KB
  • 77.8% larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (16 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    16 MB vs 9 MB
  • 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.
  • 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
  • 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
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 28 seconds shorter turbo duration
    This processor has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (56 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
    56 seconds vs 28 seconds
  • 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
  • 28 seconds shorter turbo duration
    This processor has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (56 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
    56 seconds vs 28 seconds

Video reviews

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

Not graded
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i7-11700F

  • A 65 W base power rating keeps heat and power use modest.
  • A boxed cooler is included, so you can build straight away.
  • Eight cores and 16 threads handle video editing, gaming and multitasking.
  • PCIe 4.0 with 20 lanes gives fast links to a graphics card and storage.
  • Memory support reaches 128 GB at 3200 MHz.
  • The 4 MB L2 cache helps the cores get data quickly.

What we don't like about Intel Core i7-11700F

  • There is no integrated graphics, so a graphics card is required.
  • The chip is locked, so its speed cannot be raised by hand.
  • Its boost lasts only 56 seconds, so long heavy jobs slow down.
  • It is built on the older 14 nm process, which is less efficient than newer chips.

Verdict

Rated at 65 W base power, the Intel Core i7-11700F suits a quiet home PC that does a bit of everything. Eight cores and 16 threads handle video editing, gaming and multitasking, and the 4.9 GHz boost gives quick response on single tasks in daily use. The box includes a cooler, so you can build the machine without buying one separately. The trade-off is that there is no integrated graphics, so you need a graphics card from the start. The chip is also locked, and its boost lasts only 56 seconds under long loads, so very long jobs slow down. It is a good fit for a buyer who wants an all-round PC with a ready cooler and has no plan to push the chip past its rated speed.

Compare Intel Core i7-11700F 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 i7-11700F and other processors

No results found