OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i7 11800H Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~ÂŁ330PassMark benchmark result:19714N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.6 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1787TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core i7 11800H Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.8

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 10
âś•
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 67% of models
Score components

90%

6.8

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–˛Better than 67% of processors
6.8

Technical score

Technical score
6.8/ 10
âś•
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 68% of models
Score components

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

7.5

Cache & Architecture

10%

6.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated Graphics

â–˛Better than 68% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
âś•
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ ÂŁ330

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 11800H

Technical score
Technical score
6.8/ 10
âś•
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 68% of models
Score components:

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

7.5

Cache & Architecture

10%

6.6

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated Graphics

6.8
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
âś•
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
âś•
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i7 11800H has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
7.4/ 10
âś•
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–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 72% of models
Score components:

60%

6.8

Overall score

40%

8.8

Price

7.4
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
mobile
Processor type
mobile
â–Ľ Worse than 44% of models
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 7.3% of processors and equal to that of 48.6% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1787
CPU socket
FCBGA1787
â–Ľ Worse than 70% of models
This processor uses the FCBGA1787 CPU socket, which is older than that of 70.1% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Chipset
QM580, HM570, WM590
Chipset
QM580, HM570, WM590
â–Ľ Worse than 57% of models
This processor supports QM580, HM570, WM590 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 56.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–˛ Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
N. of physical cores
8
â–˛ Better than 63% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 63.4% of processors and equal to 13.6% of processors.
CPU threads
16
CPU threads
16
â–˛ Better than 71% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 71% of processors and equal to 14% of processors.
Threads per core
2
Threads per core
2
â–˛ Better than 30% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.6 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.6 GHz
â–˛ Better than 62% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.6 GHz which is higher than that of 62.5% of processors and equal to that of 4.5% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.3 GHz
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.3 GHz
â–˛ Better than 62% of models
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.3 GHz which is higher than that of 62.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Semiconductor size
10 nm
â–˛ Better than 52% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 52.4% of processors and equal to that of 19.1% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 10 nm SuperFin
Foundry
Intel 10 nm SuperFin
â–˛ Better than 54% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 10 nm SuperFin foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 54% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
L3 cache
24 MB
L3 cache
24 MB
â–˛ Better than 82% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 81.5% of processors and equal to that of 5.8% of processors.
L2 cache
10 MB
L2 cache
10 MB
â–˛ Better than 81% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 80.5% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
L1 cache
640 KB
L1 cache
640 KB
â–˛ Better than 75% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 640 KB which is larger than that of 74.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4
â–Ľ Worse than 42% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 26.3% of processors and equal to that of 31.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
â–˛ Better than 52% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 51.8% of processors and equal to 8.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
â–˛ Better than 48% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 47.6% of processors and equal to 9.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
â–˛ Better than 62% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 61.9% of processors and equal to 21.4% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–˛ Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 750
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 750
â–˛ Better than 56% of models
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 750 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 55.7% of processors and equal to that in 1.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
32
Integrated GPU execution units
32
â–˛ Better than 71% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.9% of processors and equal to 9.9% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
â–˛ Better than 42% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.3% of processors and equal to that of 26.1% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
?
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
â–Ľ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 40.1% of processors and equal to that of 11.4% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Base power (PL1)
45 W
â–Ľ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 39.9% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
â–Ľ Worse than 10% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 3.4% of processors and equal to that of 86.1% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
Configurable TDP
yes
â–˛ Better than 47% of models
This processor supports configurable TDP. 47.3% of processors support configurable TDP.
cTDP: 45 W
Show more

Intel Core i7 11800H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 86.5% higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    19,714
    â–˛ Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (19,714 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    19,714 vs 10,572.5
  • 8 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    16
    â–˛ Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    10 MB
    â–˛ Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    10 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 76.6% better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    4,930
    â–˛ Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,930 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,930 vs 2,791
  • 61.4% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    7,792
    â–˛ Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,792 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,792 vs 4,829
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    1.25 MB/core
    â–˛ Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Tiger Lake
    â–˛ Better than 64% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 75% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    3 MB/core
    â–˛ Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    3 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC
    â–˛ Better than 50% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • 86.5% higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    19,714
    â–˛ Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (19,714 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    19,714 vs 10,572.5
  • 8 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    16
    â–˛ Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 76.6% better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    4,930
    â–˛ Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,930 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,930 vs 2,791
  • 61.4% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    7,792
    â–˛ Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,792 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,792 vs 4,829
  • 28.9% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,896
    â–˛ Better than 65% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,896 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,896 vs 1,471
  • 2 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    8
    â–˛ Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • 20.8% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,019
    â–˛ Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,019 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,019 vs 2,500
  • 7% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.6 GHz
    â–˛ Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.6 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.6 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 18% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    577
    â–˛ Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (577 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    577 vs 489
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    8 x 2.3 GHz
    â–˛ Better than 62% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    8x2.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    10 MB
    â–˛ Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    10 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    1.25 MB/core
    â–˛ Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Tiger Lake
    â–˛ Better than 64% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 75% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    3 MB/core
    â–˛ Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    3 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 3x larger L3 cache
    L3 cache
    24 MB
    â–˛ Better than 82% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    24 MB vs 8 MB
  • 66.7% larger L1 cache
    L1 cache
    640 KB
    â–˛ Better than 75% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    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
  • More advanced foundry
    Foundry
    Intel 10 nm SuperFin
    â–˛ Better than 54% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 10 nm SuperFin vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 10 nm SuperFin vs Intel 14 nm
  • 16.7% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    10 nm
    â–˛ Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (10 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    10 nm vs 12 nm
  • Newer PCIe version
    PCIe version
    4.0
    â–˛ Better than 62% of models
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Supports memory overclocking
    Memory overclocking
    yes
    â–˛ Better than 56% of models
    This processor supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not. 43.6% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    20
    â–˛ Better than 58% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    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
    Maximum memory capacity
    128 GB
    â–˛ Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    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
  • 1 more supported displays
    Maximum supported displays
    4
    â–˛ Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <1 – >6
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 7.3% larger die size
    Die size
    190 mm²
    â–Ľ Worse than 64% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (190 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    190 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 9 lower clock multiplier
    Clock multiplier
    19
    â–Ľ Worse than 83% of models
    Market range: <16 – >38
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (19 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    19 vs 28
  • 32% more expensive
    Intel Core i7 11800H is more expensive than the average processor (ÂŁ330 vs ÂŁ250).
    ÂŁ330 vs ÂŁ250
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1787
    â–Ľ Worse than 70% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1787 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1787 vs FP4
  • 32% more expensive
    Intel Core i7 11800H is more expensive than the average processor (ÂŁ330 vs ÂŁ250).
    ÂŁ330 vs ÂŁ250
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1787
    â–Ľ Worse than 70% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1787 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1787 vs FP4
  • 9 lower clock multiplier
    Clock multiplier
    19
    â–Ľ Worse than 83% of models
    Market range: <16 – >38
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (19 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    19 vs 28
  • 7.3% larger die size
    Die size
    190 mm²
    â–Ľ Worse than 64% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (190 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    190 mm² vs 177 mm²

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

L
laptopmedia.com
11/03/2022
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-11390H vs Intel Core i7-11800H – it’s more than just 10 extra Watts
L
laptopmedia.com
02/12/2021
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-11600H vs Intel Core i7-11800H – the numbers scale perfectly
L
laptopmedia.com
29/06/2021
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-11800H vs Core i7-10750H – The jump in performance is insane
P
pcworld.com
17/05/2021
Summary of the review
11th-gen 'Tiger Lake H' performance deep-dive: Intel gets back in the game
T
techspot.com
26/05/2021
Summary of the review
Intel Core i7-11800H Review: Tiger Lake H45 Put to the Test
P
pcworld.com
13/01/2022
Summary of the review
XPG Xenia 15 KC Review: A powerful gaming laptop that's actually quiet Do you need specific benchmark results (like Cinebench or gaming FPS) from any...
P
pcworld.com
30/08/2021
Summary of the review
Dell XPS 17 9710 Review: The ultimate content creation laptop
L
laptopmedia.com
18/07/2022
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-1255U vs Intel Core i7-11800H – how far can the new architecture go?
L
laptopmedia.com
11/03/2022
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-11390H vs Intel Core i7-11800H – it’s more than just 10 extra Watts
P
pcworld.com
23/08/2021
Summary of the review
Intel 11th-gen vs 10th-gen vs AMD Ryzen 5000
P
pcwelt.de
16/02/2022
Summary of the review
Review: HP Omen 16 Gaming Laptop with Intel Core i7-11800H and Nvidia GeForce RTX 3070
(Translated)Show original
L
lesnumeriques.com
14/06/2021
Summary of the review
Lab Review: Core i7-11800H detailed performance with the MSI Katana GF66
(Translated)Show original
G
geeknetic.es
23/07/2021
Summary of the review
PCSpecialist ELIMINA R Review with Core i7-11800H and RTX 3060 Geeknetic
(Translated)Show original
G
geeknetic.es
28/02/2022
Summary of the review
ACER Predator Helios 300 PH315-54 Review
(Translated)Show original
M
multiplayer.it
16/12/2021
Summary of the review
Acer Nitro 5 Review: The Laptop with Intel Core i7-11800H and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060
(Translated)Show original
F
forum.tomshw.it
02/12/2022
Summary of the review
OFFICIAL - Acer Nitro 5 Review (i7-11800H)
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
07/07/2021
Summary of the review
Intel Core i5-11400H vs Intel Core i7-11800H Comparison
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
05/07/2021
Summary of the review
Intel Core i7-11800H vs AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS Comparison – A Very Close and Fierce Battle
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
23/06/2021
Summary of the review
Intel Core i7-11800H vs AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX Comparison – The power hierarchy is shifting
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
17/06/2021
Summary of the review
Intel Core i7-11800H vs AMD Ryzen 7 5800H Comparison
(Translated)Show original
H
hardware.info
26/03/2022
Summary of the review
Apple iPad Air (2022) Review - Geekbench 5 CPU (i7-11800H Test Results)
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
18/07/2022
Summary of the review
Intel Core i7-1255U vs Intel Core i7-11800H Comparison
(Translated)Show original
T
tweakers.net
13/08/2021
Summary of the review
MSI Katana GF66 11UC-011NL - vanderark - Product reviews
(Translated)Show original
T
tweakers.net
01/12/2021
Summary of the review
Laptop Buying Guide - December 2021
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i7 11800H

  • Significant gen-over-gen performance leap, especially in multi-threaded tasks compared to 10th gen
  • Strong gaming performance, often matching or beating equivalent Ryzen 5000 series chips
  • Supports PCIe Gen 4 for faster storage and bandwidth to the GPU
  • Excellent single-threaded performance for productivity and high-FPS gaming
  • Supports AVX-512 instructions, which is beneficial for specific workloads like PS3 emulation
  • Native Thunderbolt 4 support for low-latency external devices
  • Capable of being undervolted on many laptop models to improve thermals and efficiency

What we don't like about Intel Core i7 11800H

  • High power consumption, especially during boost periods (can pull over 100W)
  • Can run very hot in thin-and-light laptop designs, potentially leading to thermal throttling
  • Inferior battery life compared to AMD Ryzen counterparts in low-power and idle scenarios
  • Requires high-end cooling solutions to maintain its maximum boost clocks effectively
  • Performance is significantly outperformed by the newer Intel 12th Gen (Alder Lake) architecture
  • Higher power requirements make it less ideal for frequent use on battery power

Verdict

The Intel Core i7-11800H is a high-end mobile processor from the 11th Gen Tiger Lake-H45 series, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads built on a 10nm SuperFin process. It operates at a 2.3 GHz base frequency with a maximum turbo boost of 4.6 GHz and includes 24 MB of Intel Smart Cache, a 45W default TDP, and support for up to 128 GB of DDR4-3200 RAM. Main pros include significant multi-threaded performance gains over previous generations, integrated Thunderbolt 4 and PCIe 4.0 support (20 lanes), and strong gaming performance that often matches higher-tier competitors. However, main cons involve high power consumption under load—often requiring robust cooling to prevent thermal throttling—and lower energy efficiency compared to some rival architectures when operating at lower power limits.

Compare Intel Core i7 11800H 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 11800H and other processors

No results found