Intel Core i5-11300H vs Intel Core i5-8600K Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8600K and Intel Core i5-11300H occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance hierarchy, with average benchmark scores of 2807 and 2792 respectively, placing both at the 51st percentile of all CPUs. The data shows a clear split: the desktop Coffee Lake chip wins decisively in one major test suite, while the mobile Tiger Lake-H part takes every other head-to-head matchup by a consistent margin. The overall average scores differ by just 0.6%, meaning the choice between these two hinges on which workloads matter most rather than any broad performance gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head data is the Geekbench multi-core test, where the Core i5-8600K scores 5997 against the Core i5-11300H’s 4907. That is a 22.2% advantage for the desktop part, the single largest delta across all eight benchmarks. This is a substantial gap, and it flips the overall narrative, because the 8600K’s six physical cores without hyper-threading clearly handle this particular multi-threaded workload better than the 11300H’s four cores with eight threads.

Every other benchmark, however, goes the other way. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 11300H scores 919 versus 867 for the 8600K, a 5.7% lead. The single-core R15 result shows a similar pattern: 129 versus 122, a 5.4% edge. Moving to Cinebench R20, the 11300H leads by 5.7% in multi-core (3833 versus 3616) and by 5.6% in single-core (540 versus 510). The R23 results repeat the same story with near-identical margins: the 11300H wins multi-core 9127 to 8611 (5.7%) and single-core 1288 to 1215 (5.7%). Finally, in Geekbench single-core, the 11300H takes another win at 1589 versus 1514, a 4.7% gap.

The consistency of the Cinebench deltas is notable. Across all six Cinebench runs, the 11300H’s advantage stays between 5.4% and 5.7%, regardless of core count or rendering complexity. This suggests a fundamental per-thread efficiency advantage for the Tiger Lake architecture that scales evenly across the workload. The 8600K’s only win, the 22.2% Geekbench multi-core result, is an outlier in the opposite direction, indicating that this specific test favors the higher core count of the desktop chip far more than any Cinebench test does.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i5-8600K wins where raw physical core count matters most. Its six cores, running at a 3.60 GHz base and 4.30 GHz boost clock, give it a decisive edge in Geekbench multi-core, a test that often scales aggressively with additional cores. For users running applications that behave like that benchmark—highly parallel, thread-hungry workloads—the 8600K is the stronger choice despite being the older design. The data supports this: the 22.2% margin is not a small difference but a dominant one in that specific test.

The Core i5-11300H wins everywhere else. Its four cores and eight threads, boosted by a 4.40 GHz maximum clock and a 10 nm process node, deliver superior results in every single-core test and in all three Cinebench multi-core variants. The single-core wins are particularly relevant for everyday responsiveness, lightly threaded applications, and gaming scenarios that depend on one or two fast cores. The 11300H’s consistency across Cinebench multi-core also suggests it handles rendering workloads efficiently despite having fewer physical cores, likely due to its higher per-thread throughput and hyper-threading.

In practical terms, the 8600K is the pick for multi-threaded number crunching that mirrors Geekbench’s scaling behavior, while the 11300H is better for a broader mix of single-threaded tasks and Cinebench-style rendering. The benchmark data does not show any other test where the 8600K pulls ahead, so its case rests entirely on that one 22.2% victory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core i5-8600K has an average benchmark score of 2807, while the Core i5-11300H scores 2792. The difference is 0.6% in favor of the desktop chip, which is within the margin of noise for the nearest rivals, including the Intel Atom x7211RE at 2811 and the Intel Xeon E-2324G at 2823.

Q: How many benchmarks does each processor win in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Core i5-11300H wins 7 of the 8 head-to-head benchmarks, covering all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests plus Geekbench single-core. The Core i5-8600K wins only 1 benchmark, the Geekbench multi-core test.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench multi-core, where the Core i5-8600K scores 5997 versus the Core i5-11300H’s 4907, a 22.2% advantage. All other deltas are below 6%, with the Cinebench tests clustering tightly between 5.4% and 5.7% in favor of the 11300H.

Q: Is the Core i5-11300H faster in single-core performance?

A: Yes, the data shows the 11300H wins every single-core test. In Geekbench single-core it scores 1589 versus 1514 (4.7% lead), and in Cinebench R23 single-core it scores 1288 versus 1215 (5.7% lead). The R15 and R20 single-core deltas are 5.4% and 5.6% respectively.

Q: Do the two processors have the same market segment?

A: No. The Core i5-8600K is a Desktop processor using the Intel Socket 1151, while the Core i5-11300H is a Mobile processor using the Intel BGA 1449 socket. The 8600K has an unlocked multiplier, while the 11300H’s multiplier is locked.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core i5-11300H has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, which is higher than the Core i5-8600K’s 4.30 GHz. The base clocks differ more substantially: the 8600K runs at 3.60 GHz base, while the 11300H runs at 2.60 GHz base.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Core i5-8600K has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Core i5-11300H has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 3.60 GHz for the desktop chip versus 2.60 GHz for the mobile chip, and boost clocks are 4.30 GHz versus 4.40 GHz respectively. Thermal design power differs sharply: the 8600K is rated at 95 W, while the 11300H is rated at 28 W.

The socket and market segment are entirely different: the 8600K uses Intel Socket 1151 for desktop, and the 11300H uses Intel BGA 1449 for mobile. The 8600K’s multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking, whereas the 11300H’s multiplier is locked. The 8600K has a launch MSRP of $257, and the 11300H has a launch MSRP of $309.

Memory bandwidth also differs: the 8600K supports 42.7 GB/s, while the 11300H supports 51.2 GB/s, both over dual-channel DDR4. PCIe capabilities are different as well: the 8600K offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 11300H offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The 8600K is marked as end-of-life, while the 11300H is marked as active production.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Core i5-8600K is built on Coffee Lake using a 14 nm process node, while the Core i5-11300H is built on Tiger Lake using a 10 nm process node. The 11300H also has a listed die size of 146.1 mm², while the 8600K has no die size listed.

Cache configurations differ per core. The 8600K has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 9 MB L3 cache. The 11300H has larger per-core caches: 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, but a smaller shared 8 MB L3 cache. This gives the 11300H a much larger total L2 cache due to the higher per-core allocation, even though it has fewer cores.

Integrated graphics are different as well. The 8600K includes UHD Graphics 630, while the 11300H includes Iris XE 80EU. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The 11300H’s Tiger Lake-H generation and 10 nm process likely contribute to its efficiency advantages, as reflected in the 28 W TDP versus the 95 W TDP of the older desktop chip, though the benchmark data shows the mobile part still wins most performance tests.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split recommendation based on workload type. For users whose primary applications resemble Geekbench multi-core — heavily parallel tasks that scale with physical core count — the Core i5-8600K is the justified choice. Its 22.2% lead in that test is the largest single margin in the entire comparison, and no other benchmark shows the 11300H winning by even half that amount. This is a decisive advantage for a specific class of computing.

For virtually everything else, the Core i5-11300H is the stronger performer. It wins all six Cinebench tests with margins between 5.4% and 5.7%, plus the Geekbench single-core test by 4.7%. Its higher boost clock, larger per-core caches, and newer 10 nm architecture translate into consistent wins across rendering and single-threaded workloads. The 11300H also achieves these results within a 28 W TDP, making it dramatically more power-efficient than the 95 W 8600K, though the benchmark data itself does not test power draw.

The overall average scores are nearly identical — 2807 versus 2792 — meaning neither chip offers a blanket performance advantage. The 8600K’s single win is large but isolated; the 11300H’s seven wins are smaller but broadly distributed. Users who can identify with the 8600K’s multi-core specialty should pick it, while those who want a more well-rounded performer, or who prioritize single-thread speed and modern mobile efficiency, should choose the 11300H. The verdict from the data is that the 11300H is the better all-around chip, but the 8600K remains the right tool for the specific job where it dominates.