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 i9-11980HK review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£480PassMark multi-core score:22134N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:5.0 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1787TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core i9-11980HK Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 12 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 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 72% of models
Score components

40%

7.3

Technical score

25%

7.3

Reviews score

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 72% 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%

7.3

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

▲Better than 60%
7.3

Technical score

Technical score
7.3/ 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 74% of models
Score components

60%

7.4

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

6.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

7.5

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 74%
7.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 57% of models

7.3

Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.2

Average grade

20%

8.8

Popularity

Grades by review (12)
5 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▼Worse than 57%
?

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~ £480
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the Intel Core i9-11980HK

Based on 5 · 7

Reviewers like the modern memory support, generational gains and productivity speed, but heat and throttling are consistent complaints.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i9-11980HK

Technical score
Technical score
7.3/ 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 74% of models
Score components:

60%

7.4

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

6.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

7.5

Integrated graphics

7.3
Reviews score
7.3
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%

7.3

Overall score

30%

8.0

Price

7.5
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1787
This processor uses the FCBGA1787 CPU socket, which is older than that of 71.5% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Chipset
QM580, HM570, WM590
This processor supports QM580, HM570, WM590 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 56.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.1% 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, SHA
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, SHA instruction sets, which is narrower support than 51.5% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
5 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5 GHz which is higher than that of 78.5% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.6 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.6 GHz which is higher than that of 65.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
22,134
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 22,134 in PassMark, which is higher than 74.4% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 10 nm SuperFin
This processor is built on the Intel 10 nm SuperFin foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 53% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
L3 cache
24 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 80.1% of processors and equal to that of 5.9% of processors.
L2 cache
10 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 79% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% 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)
3,200 MHz
This processor supports XMP/EXPO memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 91.2% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 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
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
109 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 109 W which is higher than that of 67.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
33 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 33 seconds which is shorter than that of 95.9% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Intel Core i9-11980HK vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.02x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,540 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,540 vs 5,209
  • 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
  • 93% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,134 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,134 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
  • 13.6% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 2.5x more L2 per 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
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 MB vs 3 MB
  • 9.0% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▼ Worse than 57% of models

    7.3

    Mark 7.6 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.2

    Average grade

    20%

    8.8

    Popularity

    Grades by review (12)
    5 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 7 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.3 vs 6.7
  • 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
  • 2.02x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,540 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,540 vs 5,209
  • 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
  • 93% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,134 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,134 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
  • 13.6% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 45% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,226 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,226 vs 1,535
  • 26.5% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,236 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,236 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
  • 21% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (593 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    593 vs 490
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x2.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    6 vs 4
  • 2.5x more L2 per 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
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 MB vs 3 MB
  • 62.2% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Tiger Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.67x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    24 MB vs 9 MB
  • 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
  • More advanced foundry
    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
  • 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
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 2 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (98 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    98 °C vs 100 °C
  • 90.4% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (38.2 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    38.24 vs 398.015
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, 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, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 70.3% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (109 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    109 W vs 64 W
  • 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, 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, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 92% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-11980HK is more expensive than the average processor (£480 vs £250).
    £480 vs £250
  • 7.3% larger die size
    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
  • 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
  • 92% more expensive
    Intel Core i9-11980HK is more expensive than the average processor (£480 vs £250).
    £480 vs £250
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, 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, Secure Key, 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, 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, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1787 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1787 vs FP5
  • 90.4% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (38.2 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    38.24 vs 398.015
  • 7.3% larger die size
    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
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 70.3% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (109 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    109 W vs 64 W
  • 5 seconds shorter turbo duration
    This processor has a lower turbo duration limit than the average processor (33 seconds vs 28 seconds). The average processor maintains turbo for 28 seconds.
    33 seconds vs 28 seconds

Video reviews

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

4.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
13/07/2021
Hands-on review · benchmarks, power scaling and value comparison
Verdict
Intel Core i9-11980HK is poor value: it is barely faster than the i7 and not worth its price, so most buyers should skip it.
8.0
Jarrod'sTech
≈ estimated
24/05/2021
Comparison · 11th vs 10th gen i9 laptop tests
Verdict
Intel Core i9-11980HK brings clear productivity gains over 10th gen, but gives no reason to upgrade for gaming.
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
15/07/2021
Benchmark review · Gaming laptop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-11980HK is the fastest Tiger Lake laptop chip for productivity and single-core speed, but its gaming gain over the previous model is small.
8.5
hothardware.com
✓ explicit
17/05/2021
Preview · Gaming laptop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-11980HK is a fast single-core laptop chip that leads browser and Geekbench tests, though Ryzen chips still edge it in several multi-core tests.
5.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
17/05/2021
Sample test · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-11980HK is fast in short tasks and in Far Cry New Dawn, but this thin sample heats up and slows under long loads.
7.0
pcworld.com
≈ estimated
20/05/2021
Benchmark review · Laptop CPU
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-11980HK beats older 10th-gen chips by a wide margin, but Ryzen 9 chips still lead most 3D rendering tests.
7.0
lesnumeriques.com
≈ estimated
04/06/2021
Lab test · Laptop processor
Verdict
The Intel Core i9-11980HK is about 27% faster than the Core i7-10875H and ties the Ryzen 9 5980HS, but it uses more power in this thin test laptop.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i9-11980HK

  • Industry-leading single-core and lightly-threaded performance for its generation
  • Significant 15-20% IPC improvement over previous 10th-gen Intel mobile processors
  • Excellent productivity performance in Adobe Suite and AI-driven tasks
  • Platform advantages including support for PCIe 4.0 and Thunderbolt 4
  • Fully unlocked for overclocking, allowing for higher frequency scaling in high-end laptops
  • Strong gaming performance, often surpassing competitors in CPU-bound titles

What customers don't like about Intel Core i9-11980HK

  • Poor value proposition compared to the Core i7-11800H, which offers ~95% of the performance for much less
  • High power consumption, often requiring a 65W TDP to reach its maximum potential
  • Severe thermal challenges in slim laptop chassis, leading to temperatures over 95°C and loud fan noise
  • Multi-threaded efficiency lags behind contemporary AMD Ryzen 5000 series processors at lower power levels
  • Frequent thermal throttling reported in thinner laptop designs during sustained workloads

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-11980HK is a high-performance mobile processor based on the 10nm SuperFin Tiger Lake-H architecture, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads. It operates with a base frequency of 2.6 GHz and can reach a maximum turbo boost of 5.0 GHz, supported by 24 MB of L3 cache and a thermal design power (TDP) that ranges between 45W and 65W. Key strengths include its unlocked multiplier for overclocking, support for PCIe 4.0, Thunderbolt 4, and high single-core performance ideal for gaming and intensive creative tasks. However, it faces drawbacks such as high power consumption and significant heat generation that requires advanced cooling solutions, and it is often considered a poor value choice compared to the Core i7-11800H, which provides similar performance for a lower cost.

Compare Intel Core i9-11980HK 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 i9-11980HK and other processors

No results found