Intel Core i5-11400 vs Intel Core i5-11400F Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11400F and Intel Core i5-11400 are nearly identical twins separated by a single hardware feature. Both are 6-core, 12-thread Rocket Lake desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1200 platform, built on Intel's 14 nm process with a 276 mm² die. The data shows the F-variant wins 21 of the 25 head-to-head benchmarks, while the non-F model takes only 4. The critical difference is the integrated graphics: the 11400 includes UHD Graphics 730, while the 11400F has no integrated graphics at all. This single omission explains the performance gap and the launch MSRP difference, with the 11400F listed at $157 and the 11400 at $182. The benchmark data reveals that removing the iGPU does more than just cut a feature—it appears to free up resources or thermal headroom that translates into measurable, though modest, performance gains across most workloads.

FAQ

Q: What is the primary difference between the Intel Core i5-11400F and the Intel Core i5-11400?

A: The 11400F has no integrated graphics, while the 11400 includes UHD Graphics 730. All other core specifications—6 cores, 12 threads, 2.60 GHz base clock, 4.40 GHz boost clock, 65W TDP, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache—are identical.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F has an average benchmark score of 17177, compared to the 11400's 17067. The 11400F also holds a 0.3% delta over the AMD EPYC 7H12, while the 11400 sits at a 0.0% delta against the AMD EPYC 7573X.

Q: How large is the performance difference in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The largest deltas appear in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the 11400F scores 1445 versus 1424 for the 11400, a 1.5% lead. In Geekbench multicore, the 11400F scores 7737 against 7572, a 2.2% advantage.

Q: Does the 11400 ever win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the 11400 wins 4 benchmarks: 3DMark 8-threads (4692 vs 4691), PassMark data encryption (10264 vs 10247), and both PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests (2990 vs 2981). The wins are marginal, with deltas of 0.0% to -0.3%.

Q: Are there any differences in memory, PCIe, or cache specifications?

A: No. Both support DDR4 memory with dual-channel bus and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, both use PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), and both have identical cache hierarchies: 80 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3.

Q: What is the production status and release date for both chips?

A: Both are end-of-life products, released on 2021-03-15. Their part numbers are SRKP1 for the 11400F and SRKP0 for the 11400.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear recommendation: the Intel Core i5-11400F is the better choice for anyone who already owns a discrete graphics card and does not need integrated graphics. It delivers a 2.2% lead in Geekbench multicore, a 6.2% advantage in PassMark physics, and a 4.1% edge in PassMark find prime numbers—all while carrying a lower launch MSRP of $157 versus $182. The 11400F wins 21 out of 25 head-to-head benchmarks, and its average score of 17177 outperforms the 11400's 17067 by 110 points. Both chips occupy the 71st percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier.

The Intel Core i5-11400, however, is the only one of the two that can function without a discrete GPU. Its integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides a fallback display output, which is essential for troubleshooting, basic office work, or building a system without a dedicated graphics card. The 11400 also wins the PassMark single-thread test (2990 vs 2981) and matches the 11400F in integer math (57601 vs 57624, a 0.0% delta). For a user who needs graphics output from the CPU itself, the 11400 is the only viable option despite its higher launch MSRP. Benchmark results indicate that the 11400F is the performance pick, while the 11400 is the feature-complete pick.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 11400F establishes its dominance early in the 3DMark suite, winning 5 of 6 tests. The 3DMark 4-thread test shows a 0.8% lead (3171 vs 3145), and the 2-thread test shows a 0.7% edge (1691 vs 1679). The 11400 manages a narrow 0.0% win in 3DMark 8-threads (4692 vs 4691), but the 11400F takes max-threads with 5652 against 5630, a 0.4% gain.

Cinebench results amplify the pattern. The 11400F wins all six Cinebench tests, with multicore deltas consistently at 1.5%: R15 multicore scores 1445 vs 1424, R20 multicore scores 6022 vs 5935, and R23 multicore scores 14340 vs 14132. Single-core deltas range from 1.5% to 2.0%, with R15 single-core showing 204 vs 200. Geekbench follows with the largest multicore margin of the entire comparison: the 11400F's 7737 beats the 11400's 7572 by 2.2%, while single-core shows 1777 vs 1750, a 1.5% advantage.

PassMark tests reveal the most dramatic outlier. The 11400F wins PassMark physics by 6.2% (842 vs 793), and PassMark find prime numbers by 4.1% (51 vs 49). Other PassMark wins are narrower: multithread scores 16908 vs 16690 (1.3%), data compression scores 208472 vs 206952 (0.7%), and floating point math scores 34127 vs 34004 (0.4%). The 11400 counters with a -0.3% delta in single-thread (2990 vs 2981) and a -0.2% delta in data encryption (10264 vs 10247), but these are the only two tests where the non-F chip leads, plus the tied 0.0% in integer math.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets are almost identical, with one decisive exception. The 11400F lists integratedGraphics as null, while the 11400 lists UHD Graphics 730. This is the only functional difference between the two processors.

Beyond the iGPU, all other fields match exactly: both have 6 cores, 12 threads, a 2.60 GHz base clock, a 4.40 GHz boost clock, a 65W TDP, and use the Intel Socket 1200. The launch MSRP differs, with the 11400F at $157 and the 11400 at $182, reflecting the removed graphics hardware. The part numbers differ (SRKP1 vs SRKP0), which is the only other distinguishing field. The 11400F also has a higher average benchmark score (17177 vs 17067) and a different set of nearest rivals, though both sit at the 71st percentile.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the identical Rocket Lake architecture on Intel's 14 nm process, fabricated by Intel with a die size of 276 mm². The cache hierarchy is unchanged: 80 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is the same DDR4 dual-channel configuration with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and both use PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The sole architectural difference is the presence or absence of the integrated graphics unit. The 11400's UHD Graphics 730 is a full graphics solution, while the 11400F has no iGPU block at all. This does not change the core count, thread count, or clock speeds, but the benchmark data suggests it affects thermal and power behavior. The 11400F's consistent, if small, lead across multi-threaded tests—including a 6.2% advantage in PassMark physics—implies that the absent iGPU allows the CPU cores to sustain slightly higher performance, likely due to reduced power draw from the graphics portion of the die.

Where Each One Wins

The 11400F wins in every scenario where a discrete GPU is present. For gaming systems, content creation workstations, or any build with a dedicated graphics card, the data shows the 11400F is faster in 21 of 25 benchmarks. Its largest wins are in physics simulation (6.2% over the 11400 in PassMark physics), prime number computation (4.1% in PassMark find prime numbers), and general productivity (2.2% in Geekbench multicore). The 11400F also holds a 1.5% lead across all Cinebench R23 tests, both single and multicore, making it the pick for rendering workloads.

The 11400 wins in exactly one practical scenario: when no discrete GPU is available. Its integrated UHD Graphics 730 makes it a self-contained processor capable of outputting video without additional hardware. This is crucial for basic office machines, home theater PCs, or emergency troubleshooting systems. The 11400 also edges out the 11400F in PassMark single-thread performance (2990 vs 2981) and data encryption (10264 vs 10247), though these margins are negligible at -0.3% and -0.2%. For users who absolutely need integrated graphics, the 11400 is the only choice, but for everyone else, the benchmark results consistently favor the 11400F.