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 i9-11900T review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£400PassMark multi-core score:18515N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.9 GHzCPU socket:LGA1200TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

Intel Core i9-11900T Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

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 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 61% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

?

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

25%

?

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

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

▲Better than 61% of processors
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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 60% of models
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

8.4

Price

▲Better than 60%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 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 63% of models
Score components

60%

6.8

Performance

18%

5.6

Architecture

10%

6.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

7.3

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 63%
?

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
▼
<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.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £400
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 i9-11900T

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 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 63% of models
Score components:

60%

6.8

Performance

18%

5.6

Architecture

10%

6.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

7.3

Integrated graphics

6.7
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 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 60% of models
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

8.4

Price

7.5
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
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA instruction sets, which is broader support than 52.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
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 1.5 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x1.5 GHz which is lower than that of 62.3% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
18,515
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 18,515 in PassMark, which is higher than 66% 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
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 750
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 750 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 56.6% of processors and equal to that in 1.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
32
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% 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
?
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.2% of processors and equal to that of 14% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.3% of processors and equal to that of 14.1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
115 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 115 W which is higher than that of 68.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.6% 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
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
Show more

Intel Core i9-11900T 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
  • 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
  • 61.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (18,515 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    18,515 vs 11,469
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Rocket Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 42.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,182 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,182 vs 1,535
  • 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
  • 48.5% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,735 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,735 vs 5,209
  • 28.2% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,279 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,279 vs 2,558
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1200 vs FP5).
    LGA1200 vs FP5
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 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
  • 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
  • 61.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (18,515 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    18,515 vs 11,469
  • 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
  • 42.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,182 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,182 vs 1,535
  • 28.2% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,279 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,279 vs 2,558
  • 48.5% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,735 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,735 vs 5,209
  • 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
  • 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 vs 3
  • 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
  • 22.2% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 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
  • 60.5% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (134.3 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    134.28 vs 340.075
  • 79.7% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    115 W vs 64 W
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, 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, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 60% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-11900T is more expensive than the average processor (£400 vs £250).
    £400 vs £250
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 13 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (15 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    15 vs 28
  • 60% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-11900T is more expensive than the average processor (£400 vs £250).
    £400 vs £250
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, 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, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 60.5% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (134.3 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    134.28 vs 340.075
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (8x1.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x1.5 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 13 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (15 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    15 vs 28
  • 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
  • 79.7% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    115 W vs 64 W

Video reviews

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

Overview video

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-11900T

  • Extremely low power consumption with a 35W Thermal Design Power (TDP)
  • Remains very cool during operation, often staying well below 50°C
  • Strong single-threaded performance for a low-power chip, comparable to Zen 3 in some tests
  • Supports 20 PCIe 4.0 lanes, enabling an extra M.2 slot compared to 10th Gen processors
  • Ideal for Small Form Factor (SFF) builds, home servers, and OEM workstations
  • Capable of handling modern AAA gaming when paired with a competent dedicated GPU

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-11900T

  • Significant reduction in base clock speed (1.5GHz) compared to standard or 'K' series models
  • Worse multi-core performance than its predecessor (i9-10900 series) due to a reduction from 10 to 8 cores
  • Poor value for performance; often outperformed by cheaper, newer i5 or Ryzen 5 processors
  • Performance is strictly limited by a tight power envelope, making it slower than 65W or 125W variants
  • Difficult to find in stock through traditional retailers as it is primarily intended for OEMs
  • Limited upgrade path as the LGA1200 socket and Z590 motherboards do not support 12th Gen or newer CPUs

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-11900T is a low-power, 11th Gen Rocket Lake-S desktop processor featuring 8 cores, 16 threads, and a 16MB L3 cache, designed primarily for power-efficient small form factor builds and OEM workstations. Built on a 14nm process with the Cypress Cove architecture, it operates at a modest 1.50 GHz base frequency but can boost up to 4.90 GHz via Intel Turbo Boost Max 3.0, all while maintaining a remarkably low 35W TDP. Its primary advantages include excellent energy efficiency, reduced heat output, and solid single-core performance that rivals higher-wattage chips in short bursts. However, its main drawbacks are the significantly lower multi-threaded performance compared to its 65W or 125W counterparts and a premium price point that often results in poor value for users who do not strictly require its specific low-power envelope.

Compare Intel Core i9-11900T 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 i9-11900T and other processors

No results found