Intel Core i5-11400 vs Intel Core i7-1260P Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11400 and Intel Core i7-1260P represent two fundamentally different approaches to processing power: a desktop-first, high-power design versus a mobile-first, efficiency-oriented hybrid. Benchmark data shows the i5-11400 wins 12 of 23 head-to-head tests, while the i7-1260P takes 11, yet the nature of those wins reveals a stark divide in workload suitability. The i5-11400 excels in sustained multi-threaded throughput and memory-intensive tasks, while the i7-1260P counters with superior single-thread responsiveness and certain math workloads. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical—17067 for the i5-11400 versus 17007 for the i7-1260P—placing both in the 70th-71st percentile of all CPUs. The choice between them hinges entirely on platform and use case, not raw aggregate capability.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split: choose the Intel Core i5-11400 for desktop builds where sustained multi-core performance and memory bandwidth are priorities, and choose the Intel Core i7-1260P for mobile systems where single-thread speed and a 28 W TDP matter more than raw multi-core grunt. The i5-11400’s decisive 45.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (14132 vs 9711) and 48.5% lead in 3DMark 8-thread tests (4692 vs 3159) make it the pick for rendering or compilation workloads. Conversely, the i7-1260P’s 17.7% advantage in Cinebench R15 single-core (243 vs 200) and 8% lead in Passmark single-thread (3250 vs 2990) favor it for responsive everyday tasks. Since the i7-1260P is an active mobile part and the i5-11400 is end-of-life desktop silicon, the platform choice largely dictates the decision—but if you have the socket, the i5-11400 delivers more multi-core performance for the same average score.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-11400 dominates in scenarios that stress all cores and the memory subsystem. Its biggest victories come in 3DMark 8-thread (48.5% ahead), Cinebench R23 multi-core (45.5% ahead), and 3DMark 16-thread (37.7% ahead). It also wins in extended instruction workloads (Passmark 14901 vs 10493, a 42% gap) and data compression (206952 vs 182968, a 13.1% lead). This pattern indicates a processor that scales well with thread count and sustained load, likely due to its 6 cores with 12 threads and a 65 W TDP allowing consistent boost behavior. The i5-11400 also takes Cinebench R20 multi-core by a slim 1% (5935 vs 5874), showing that its advantage grows with longer, heavier workloads.

The Intel Core i7-1260P counters in single-thread and specific math tasks. It wins Passmark physics by a wide 27.4% margin (1092 vs 793), floating-point math by 19.8% (42417 vs 34004), and prime number finding by 22.2% (63 vs 49). Its single-thread wins include Cinebench R15 single-core (243 vs 200, +17.7%) and Passmark single-thread (3250 vs 2990, +8%). The i7-1260P also edges out the i5-11400 in data encryption (11238 vs 10264, +8.7%) and integer math (62316 vs 57601, +7.6%). The 3DMark single-thread result favors the i7-1260P as well (915 vs 865, +5.5%). These wins suggest the i7-1260P’s higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz, versus 4.40 GHz for the i5-11400, gives it a genuine edge in latency-sensitive or branch-heavy code.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and process nodes. The i5-11400 uses the Rocket Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, with a die size of 276 mm². The i7-1260P uses the Alder Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, with a smaller die size of 217 mm². Core counts differ significantly: the i5-11400 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i7-1260P has 12 cores and 16 threads—the latter likely using a hybrid configuration of performance and efficiency cores, though the data does not specify the split. Cache layouts also diverge: the i5-11400 has 512 KB L2 per core and 12 MB shared L3, while the i7-1260P has 1.25 MB L2 per core and 18 MB shared L3, with both sharing 80 KB L1 per core.

Memory support is a notable differentiator. The i5-11400 supports only DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a rated bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The i7-1260P supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but its memory bandwidth is not specified in the data. The i7-1260P’s integrated graphics are the Iris Xe 96EU, whereas the i5-11400 uses the more modest UHD Graphics 730. Both processors use Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes (CPU only), and neither supports ECC memory nor has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-11400 launched with an MSRP of $182 and is end-of-life, while the i7-1260P is active with no launch MSRP listed. The i7-1260P’s 28 W TDP is less than half the i5-11400’s 65 W, explaining the mobile market segment for the former and desktop for the latter.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400 has an average benchmark score of 17067, while the Intel Core i7-1260P scores 17007. The difference is 60 points, which is negligible and places both at the 71st and 70th percentile of all CPUs, respectively.

Q: Is the i7-1260P faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: Yes, the data shows the i7-1260P wins Passmark single-thread with 3250 versus 2990 for the i5-11400, an 8% lead. It also takes Cinebench R15 single-core by 17.7% (243 vs 200) and 3DMark single-thread by 5.5% (915 vs 865).

Q: Does the i5-11400 ever lose to the i7-1260P in multi-core tests?

A: Yes, in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-1260P wins with 1626 versus 1424 for the i5-11400, a 12.4% margin. However, in heavier multi-core tests like Cinebench R23, the i5-11400 leads by 45.5%, indicating the i7-1260P’s advantage fades under sustained load.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The i5-11400 supports only DDR4 with dual-channel memory, rated at 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-1260P supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but its bandwidth is not specified in the data.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i7-1260P has 18 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 12 MB on the i5-11400. The i7-1260P also has larger L2 cache per core at 1.25 MB versus 512 KB on the i5-11400.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, neither the i5-11400 nor the i7-1260P has an unlocked multiplier. Both are locked processors, according to the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Intel Core i5-11400 is in 3DMark 8-thread, where it scores 4692 against 3159 for the i7-1260P, a 48.5% advantage. This is followed by Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i5-11400 hits 14132 versus 9711, a 45.5% lead. In 3DMark 16-thread, the i5-11400 posts 5609 against 4072, a 37.7% margin. Passmark extended instructions shows a 42% gap (14901 vs 10493) in favor of the i5-11400. Even in 3DMark max-threads, the i5-11400 leads by 27.8% (5630 vs 4406). These wins suggest the i5-11400’s desktop power envelope allows it to sustain high clocks across all cores, crushing the mobile part in throughput-bound tests.

The Intel Core i7-1260P’s biggest victory comes in Passmark physics, where it scores 1092 against 793, a 27.4% margin. It also wins Passmark floating-point math by 19.8% (42417 vs 34004) and Cinebench R15 single-core by 17.7% (243 vs 200). The i7-1260P takes Passmark find prime numbers by 22.2% (63 vs 49) and Passmark data encryption by 8.7% (11238 vs 10264). In Passmark integer math, it leads by 7.6% (62316 vs 57601). The close results in Passmark multithread (16775 vs 16690, a 0.5% edge for the i7-1260P) and Cinebench R20 multi-core (5935 vs 5874, a 1% edge for the i5-11400) show these chips are evenly matched in aggregate, but the i7-1260P’s single-thread and math-specific wins give it a niche for latency-sensitive applications. The data overall paints a picture of two processors that trade blows, with the i5-11400 winning the heavy lifting and the i7-1260P winning the quick-response tasks.