Intel Core i5-11400F vs Intel Core i5-1240U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear split between these two Intel processors. The Intel Core i5-11400F dominates in raw multi-threaded workloads, while the Intel Core i5-1240U shows strength in specific single-thread and efficiency-oriented tasks. Across the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, the 11400F wins 12, while the 1240U takes 5.

The most dramatic separation appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core. The 11400F scores 14340 against the 1240U's 7902, a 81.5% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison set. The pattern continues in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the 11400F leads 6022 to 5013, a 20.1% gap. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 11400F posts 1445 versus 1242, a 16.3% edge.

PassMark extended instructions shows another massive gap. The 11400F scores 14976, while the 1240U manages 7932, a 88.8% difference. Data compression follows suit: 208472 for the 11400F against 143102 for the 1240U, a 45.7% lead. Random string sorting also favors the desktop chip by 50.8%, with scores of 24124 and 15996 respectively.

The 11400F wins the remaining multi-threaded tests by smaller but consistent margins. PassMark integer math shows 57624 versus 44968, a 28.1% advantage. PassMark multithread records 16908 against 13406, a 26.1% difference. Floating point math lands at 34127 for the 11400F and 29726 for the 1240U, a 14.8% win. Data encryption closes in at 10247 versus 8964, a 14.3% margin.

Single-core results tell a different story. Cinebench R15 single-core goes to the 1240U with 226 versus 204, a 9.7% victory for the mobile chip. PassMark single-thread shows 3239 for the 1240U against 2981 for the 11400F, an 8% edge. PassMark physics also favors the 1240U, posting 981 versus 842, a 14.2% difference. The 1240U wins PassMark find prime numbers 63 to 51, a 19% margin.

Notably, Cinebench R20 single-core and R23 single-core break the pattern. The 11400F leads R20 single-core 850 to 707, a 20.2% advantage. In R23 single-core, the 11400F scores 2024 against 1559, a 29.8% lead. These results indicate the desktop chip can outperform in certain single-threaded scenarios despite the 1240U's wins elsewhere.

The average benchmark scores tell an interesting story. The 11400F holds an average score of 17177 with a percentile ranking of 71 against all CPUs. The 1240U averages 16957, ranking at the 70th percentile. The delta between their averages is only 1.3%, despite the multi-core dominance of the 11400F. This suggests the 1240U's single-thread wins help balance its overall profile.

Nearest rival data adds context. The 11400F sits within 0.6% of the AMD EPYC 7H12 and Intel Core Ultra 7 164U, while trailing the Intel Core i5-12450H by 0.4% and AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300G by 0.6%. The 1240U compares closely to the AMD EPYC 7702 and AMD Ryzen 5 7235HS, with deltas of 0.1% and 0.3%, while falling 0.2% behind the AMD EPYC 7742 and 0.3% behind the Intel Core i7-1260P.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct use cases. The Intel Core i5-11400F is the clear choice for anyone running sustained multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14340 almost doubles the 1240U's 7902, and its 88.8% lead in extended instructions makes it suitable for complex computational tasks. The 11400F also leads in data compression by 45.7%, making it better for file archiving and database operations.

The Intel Core i5-1240U wins where single-thread responsiveness and power efficiency matter. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3239 exceeds the 11400F's 2981, and its Cinebench R15 single-core win of 226 versus 204 shows strength in lightly threaded applications. The 1240U also leads in physics simulations, scoring 981 against 842, which suggests better performance in certain gaming or simulation workloads that rely on a few fast cores.

The 1240U's 9W TDP versus the 11400F's 65W TDP makes it suited for mobile platforms. The 11400F requires a desktop socket and a dedicated cooling solution, while the 1240U is built for thin-and-light laptops. Users needing portability should choose the 1240U. Users building a desktop workstation should choose the 11400F.

Neither processor is unlocked for overclocking, according to the multiplier locked status on both. The 11400F is end-of-life, while the 1240U remains active in production. This matters for long-term availability. The 11400F launched with a $157 MSRP, which the database records as its launch price.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel generations and process nodes. The 11400F uses Rocket Lake on a 14 nm process, while the 1240U uses Alder Lake-U on a 10 nm node. The die size for the 11400F is 276 mm², while the 1240U's die size is not recorded in the database.

Core counts differ significantly. The 11400F has 6 cores and 12 threads. The 1240U has 10 cores and 12 threads. Despite the 1240U's higher core count, the 11400F wins most multi-threaded benchmarks, indicating the desktop chip's cores run at higher sustained performance levels.

Cache hierarchies show structural differences. Both share 12 MB of L3 cache, but the L2 cache differs. The 11400F has 512 KB per core, while the 1240U has 1.25 MB per core. L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core. The 1240U's larger L2 allocation reflects its hybrid architecture approach, even though the database does not specify performance versus efficiency core counts.

Memory support diverges. The 11400F supports DDR4 only, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The 1240U supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but its memory bandwidth is not recorded. This gives the 1240U flexibility for newer memory standards.

PCIe capabilities differ. The 11400F offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The 1240U also supports Gen 4, but the database does not list a lane count. The 11400F has no integrated graphics, while the 1240U includes Iris Xe 80EU graphics. This makes the 1240U usable without a discrete GPU, while the 11400F requires one.

Clock behavior shows differences in base clocks. The 11400F has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The 1240U has a base clock of 1100.00 MHz, which is substantially lower, but reaches the same 4.40 GHz boost. The 1240U's low base clock likely relates to its 9W TDP, while the 11400F sustains 65W.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-11400F wins all multi-core benchmarks. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14340 beats the 1240U's 7902 by 81.5%. In PassMark multithread, the 11400F leads 16908 to 13406, a 26.1% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-1240U win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the 1240U wins 5 of 17 comparisons. It leads in Cinebench R15 single-core, PassMark single-thread, PassMark physics, and PassMark find prime numbers. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3239 exceeds the 11400F's 2981 by 8%.

Q: How do their average scores compare?

A: The 11400F averages 17177 across all benchmarks, while the 1240U averages 16957. This puts the 11400F at the 71st percentile and the 1240U at the 70th percentile against all CPUs. The difference is approximately 1.3%.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The 1240U supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the 11400F supports DDR4 only. Both use dual-channel memory. The 11400F has a recorded memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, while the 1240U's bandwidth is not listed in the database.

Q: Does either processor have integrated graphics?

A: Only the 1240U includes integrated graphics, specifically Iris Xe 80EU. The 11400F has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: What is the core count difference?

A: The 11400F has 6 cores and 12 threads. The 1240U has 10 cores and 12 threads. Despite having more cores, the 1240U loses most multi-threaded benchmarks due to lower sustained performance.

Where Each One Wins

The 11400F wins in all heavy computational tasks. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 14340 makes it suitable for video rendering, 3D modeling, and batch processing. The 88.8% lead in extended instructions suggests strong performance in scientific computing and cryptography-related workloads. Data compression at 208472 versus 143102 means faster file archiving and database operations. Integer math at 57624 versus 44968 supports complex financial modeling and engineering simulations.

The 1240U wins in tasks that favor burst performance and power efficiency. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3239 versus 2981 makes it better for everyday application launches, web browsing, and office productivity. The PassMark physics score of 981 against 842 suggests an edge in physics-based simulations that rely on a few fast threads. The find prime numbers result, 63 versus 51, points to strength in integer-heavy single-threaded algorithms.

The 1240U's 9W TDP versus the 11400F's 65W TDP makes it the only viable choice for fanless or low-power designs. The 11400F's desktop socket and lack of integrated graphics restrict it to desktop builds with discrete GPUs. The 1240U's BGA 1781 socket and integrated graphics enable compact laptop designs.

For users who prioritize sustained multi-core throughput, the 11400F is the data-backed choice. For users who need single-thread responsiveness in a mobile form factor, the 1240U wins on the recorded metrics.

Specification Differences

The database records several fields where these two processors diverge. Core count differs: 6 cores for the 11400F versus 10 cores for the 1240U, though both have 12 threads. Base clock differs dramatically: 2.60 GHz for the 11400F versus 1100.00 MHz for the 1240U. Boost clock is identical at 4.40 GHz.

TDP is a major separator: 65W for the 11400F versus 9W for the 1240U. Socket types differ: Intel Socket 1200 for the 11400F, Intel BGA 1781 for the 1240U. Architecture and codename differ: Rocket Lake versus Alder Lake-U. Process nodes differ: 14 nm versus 10 nm. Die size is 276 mm² for the 11400F, while the 1240U has no recorded die size.

L2 cache differs: 512 KB per core for the 11400F, 1.25 MB per core for the 1240U. L3 cache is the same at 12 MB shared. Memory support differs: DDR4 for the 11400F, DDR4 and DDR5 for the 1240U. Memory bandwidth is 51.2 GB/s for the 11400F, not recorded for the 1240U. PCIe specifications differ: Gen 4 with 20 lanes for the 11400F, Gen 4 without a lane count for the 1240U.

Integrated graphics are absent on the 11400F, present as Iris Xe 80EU on the 1240U. Market segments differ: Desktop versus Mobile. Production status differs: End-of-life for the 11400F, Active for the 1240U. Release dates differ: 2021-03-15 for the 11400F, 2022-02-22 for the 1240U. The 11400F has a recorded launch MSRP of $157, while the 1240U has no recorded MSRP. Part numbers differ: SRKP1 for the 11400F, none recorded for the 1240U. Both have locked multipliers and no ECC memory support.