Intel Core i5-10600 vs Intel Core i5-11300H Comparison

The Intel Core i5-10600 and Intel Core i5-11300H represent two distinct interpretations of a mid-range Core i5, separated by architecture generation and market segment. The 10600 is a 6-core/12-thread desktop part built on the 14 nm Comet Lake process, while the 11300H is a 4-core/8-thread mobile processor using the 10 nm Tiger Lake-H design. Despite the newer node and mobile efficiency focus of the 11300H, benchmark data shows the desktop 10600 consistently outperforms it across all tested Cinebench workloads, with the 10600 holding a 7.5% to 7.8% lead in every head-to-head comparison. However, both chips land at the 51st percentile in the global CPU database, indicating they occupy a similar overall performance tier when all processors are considered.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i5-10600 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-11300H has 4 cores and 8 threads. This gives the 10600 a 50% advantage in both core count and thread count.

Q: What is the performance difference in multi-core workloads?

A: The 10600 leads in all multi-core Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 10600 scores 9809 versus the 11300H’s 9127, a 7.5% advantage. Similar margins appear in R20 (4119 vs 3833) and R15 (988 vs 919).

Q: How do the single-core scores compare?

A: The 10600 also wins every single-core test. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the 10600 scores 581 against the 11300H’s 540, a 7.6% lead. The R23 single-core gap is 7.5% (1384 vs 1288), and the R15 single-core gap is 7.8% (139 vs 129).

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the 11300H wins?

A: No. In the provided head-to-head benchmark data, the 10600 wins all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, and R23, both multi-core and single-core). The 11300H has zero wins in this comparison.

Q: What are the process nodes and sockets?

A: The 10600 uses a 14 nm process and fits the Intel Socket 1200. The 11300H uses a 10 nm process and is a mobile BGA 1449 package. The 11300H also has a smaller die size at 146.1 mm².

Q: What is the integrated graphics difference?

A: The 10600 integrates UHD Graphics 630, while the 11300H features Iris XE 80EU. The 11300H’s integrated graphics solution is from a newer generation, but the benchmark data does not include graphics performance tests.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly at the architectural level. The Intel Core i5-10600 is built on the Comet Lake architecture using a 14 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry. In contrast, the Intel Core i5-11300H uses the Tiger Lake-H architecture on a 10 nm process, also from Intel’s foundry. This generational shift brings a substantially different physical design: the 11300H has a die size of 146.1 mm², while the 10600’s die size is not specified in the data.

Cache hierarchies reveal another major difference. The 10600 allocates 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, with a 12 MB shared L3 cache. The 11300H provides a larger per-core footprint with 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but a smaller 8 MB shared L3 cache. This means the mobile chip offers more private cache per core—critical for its lower thread count—while the desktop chip leans on a larger pool of shared cache.

Memory and I/O capabilities also differ. Both support DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, but the 11300H’s memory bandwidth is rated higher at 51.2 GB/s versus the 10600’s 42.7 GB/s. The PCIe implementation is a notable generational leap: the 11300H provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the 10600 uses Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The 11300H also integrates Iris XE 80EU graphics, compared to the 10600’s UHD Graphics 630. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers.

Clock speeds and power targets reflect their intended environments. The 10600 runs at a 3.30 GHz base clock and 4.80 GHz boost clock with a 65 W TDP. The 11300H has a lower 2.60 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, but a much lower 28 W TDP—a deliberate trade-off for mobile thermal constraints. The 11300H launched on 2021-01-10 with a launch MSRP of $309, while the 10600 launched earlier on 2020-04-29 with no listed MSRP.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for raw compute performance: the Intel Core i5-10600. It wins every head-to-head benchmark with a consistent 7.5% to 7.8% margin. This advantage stems directly from its higher core and thread counts (6/12 versus 4/8) and notably higher boost clock (4.80 GHz versus 4.40 GHz). For anyone building a desktop system where power draw is not the primary constraint, the 10600 is the stronger choice across all Cinebench workloads.

The 11300H is not without merit, but its strengths lie outside the benchmark results presented here. Its 10 nm process, higher memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s), and Gen 4 PCIe support suggest a more modern platform for mobile use. Its integrated Iris XE 80EU graphics are also a generational step up from the UHD Graphics 630. However, the benchmark data shows no scenario where the 11300H outperforms the 10600 in CPU-bound rendering tasks.

Given the 51st percentile ranking for both chips, they sit at the same global performance tier. The choice should hinge on platform: the 10600 is a desktop Socket 1200 part with a 65 W TDP, while the 11300H is a mobile BGA 1449 part at 28 W. The 10600 is the pick for desktop users prioritizing multi-threaded performance, and the 11300H is the pick for laptop designs where the smaller process node and lower power envelope are essential.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the Intel Core i5-10600 and Intel Core i5-11300H:

• Cores: 6 (10600) vs 4 (11300H)
• Threads: 12 (10600) vs 8 (11300H)
• Base Clock: 3.30 GHz (10600) vs 2.60 GHz (11300H)
• Boost Clock: 4.80 GHz (10600) vs 4.40 GHz (11300H)
• TDP: 65 W (10600) vs 28 W (11300H)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1200 (10600) vs Intel BGA 1449 (11300H)
• Architecture: Comet Lake (10600) vs Tiger Lake (11300H)
• Codename: Comet Lake (10600) vs Tiger Lake-H (11300H)
• Process Node: 14 nm (10600) vs 10 nm (11300H)
• Die Size: Not specified (10600) vs 146.1 mm² (11300H)
• L1 Cache: 64 KB per core (10600) vs 80 KB per core (11300H)
• L2 Cache: 256 KB per core (10600) vs 1.25 MB per core (11300H)
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared (10600) vs 8 MB shared (11300H)
• Memory Bandwidth: 42.7 GB/s (10600) vs 51.2 GB/s (11300H)
• PCIe: Gen 3, 16 Lanes (10600) vs Gen 4, 20 Lanes (11300H)
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 630 (10600) vs Iris XE 80EU (11300H)
• Market Segment: Desktop (10600) vs Mobile (11300H)
• Release Date: 2020-04-29 (10600) vs 2021-01-10 (11300H)
• Launch MSRP: Not listed (10600) vs $309 (11300H)
• Part Number: SRH37 (10600) vs SRKH6 (11300H)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-10600 wins all six recorded comparisons. The narrowest margin is 7.5%, and the widest is 7.8%, indicating a consistent and repeatable performance gap across different Cinebench versions and workload types.

Starting with multi-core performance, the 10600’s advantage is steady. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 10600 scores 988 against the 11300H’s 919, a 7.5% lead. This pattern repeats in R20 multi-core (4119 vs 3833, 7.5%) and R23 multi-core (9809 vs 9127, 7.5%). The consistency is striking—despite different rendering engines and workload intensities, the delta does not move. This suggests the 6-core/12-thread configuration of the 10600 provides a structural advantage that the 11300H’s newer architecture cannot overcome.

Single-core results tell a similar story with slightly larger margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the 10600 scores 139 versus 129, a 7.8% win. The R20 single-core test shows 581 against 540, a 7.6% margin. R23 single-core rounds out the set with 1384 versus 1288, a 7.5% lead. The fact that the 10600 wins single-core tests by nearly the same margin as multi-core tests is notable—it implies that the 10600’s higher boost clock (4.80 GHz versus 4.40 GHz) is sufficient to offset any IPC gains from the 11300H’s 10 nm Tiger Lake design.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this hierarchy. The 10600 has an average benchmark score of 2837, while the 11300H sits at 2792. This difference of 45 points is modest, but it aligns with the percentile rankings—both processors are at the 51st percentile. When compared to their nearest rivals, the 10600 sits within 0.5% of the Intel Core i7-6800K (deltaPct 0) and the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 5450U (deltaPct 0.3). The 11300H is similarly close to the Intel Core i5-8600K (deltaPct -0.5) and the Intel Xeon E5-4627 v3 (deltaPct 0.1). This places both chips in a tightly contested mid-range band, but the head-to-head results leave no doubt that the 10600 is the faster processor in Cinebench workloads.