Intel Core i5-11500 vs Intel Core i9-11900F Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11500 and Intel Core i9-11900F are both 11th Generation Rocket Lake desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1200 platform, but they occupy different tiers within that lineup. The data shows a consistent and substantial performance gap across every benchmark recorded, with the i9-11900F winning all 17 head-to-head comparisons. This analysis breaks down the magnitude of those wins, the architectural reasons behind them, and the specific use cases where each processor’s profile makes it the more suitable choice.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core i9-11900F outperforms the Intel Core i5-11500 in every single test recorded in the FACT PACK. The smallest margin is in single-threaded PassMark tests, where the i9-11900F scores 3413 against the i5-11500’s 3131, a delta of -8.3%. This shows that while the i9 has a higher boost clock, the single-core advantage is relatively modest compared to the multi-core gap.

Moving to Cinebench, the pattern becomes clearer. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-11900F scores 18759 versus the i5-11500’s 14513, a -22.6% difference. The single-core R23 test shows a similar delta at -22.6%, with scores of 2648 and 2049 respectively. This consistency across both single and multi-core tests indicates the i9’s advantage is not just about core count but also about clock speed and cache efficiency. The Cinebench R20 results mirror this exactly, with the i9 leading by -22.6% in multi-core (7878 vs 6095) and -22.7% in single-core (1112 vs 860).

The most pronounced differences appear in PassMark’s math workloads. In integer math, the i9-11900F scores 83718 against the i5-11500’s 58352, a massive -30.3% delta. Floating-point math shows a -29.1% gap (48562 vs 34422). These figures suggest the i9’s additional cores and larger cache provide a significant advantage in compute-heavy tasks that scale well with parallelism. Data compression also favors the i9 heavily, with a -24.9% delta (280847 vs 210796), while data encryption shows a -22.3% gap (13636 vs 10592).

The i9-11900F also wins decisively in the PassMark multi-thread test, scoring 22115 versus 17107 (-22.6%), and in the physics test, 949 versus 823 (-13.3%). Even in prime number finding, where the delta is smaller at -16.4% (61 vs 51), the i9 still leads. Across all 17 recorded benchmarks, the i9-11900F wins every time, with deltas ranging from -8.3% to -30.3%. The data shows no scenario where the i5-11500 closes the gap or takes a lead.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i9-11900F in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i9-11900F scores 18759, which is 22.6% higher than the i5-11500’s 14513 in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the i9-11900F leads by 30.3% with a score of 83718 versus 58352.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel Core i5-11500 includes UHD Graphics 750, while the Intel Core i9-11900F has no integrated graphics (null in the data).

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i9-11900F scores 2648 versus 2049 for the i5-11500, a 22.6% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the gap is smaller at 8.3% (3413 vs 3131).

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The i9-11900F has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the i5-11500 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the i5-11500 wins?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the i9-11900F wins all 17 recorded benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Rocket Lake architecture, using Intel’s 14 nm process node and a die size of 276 mm². The core counts differ significantly: the i5-11500 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i9-11900F has 8 cores and 16 threads. This two-core, four-thread advantage is a primary driver of the multi-core performance gap.

Cache configuration also differs. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache is larger on the i9-11900F: 16 MB versus 12 MB on the i5-11500. That extra 4 MB of L3 cache helps with data reuse and reduces memory latency in workloads that exceed the smaller cache’s capacity.

Clock speeds are another differentiator. The i5-11500 has a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the i9-11900F has a lower base clock of 2.50 GHz but a much higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The higher boost clock explains why the i9’s single-core advantage (8.3% in PassMark) is smaller than its multi-core advantage but still positive. The TDP for both is listed as 65 watts, and both support dual-channel DDR4 memory with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Memory and PCIe support are identical: DDR4, dual-channel, and PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Neither supports ECC memory. Both are end-of-life products released on the same date, 2021-03-15, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The key architectural differences are core count, L3 cache size, and boost clock.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for most workloads: the Intel Core i9-11900F is faster in every measured benchmark. If the priority is maximum performance in multi-threaded applications, the i9-11900F delivers a 22.6% to 30.3% advantage in math-heavy tasks and a consistent 22.6% lead in Cinebench multi-core tests. Its larger L3 cache (16 MB vs 12 MB) and higher boost clock (5.20 GHz vs 4.60 GHz) also provide a meaningful edge in single-threaded performance, though the gap there is smaller.

The i5-11500’s only advantage in the data is its integrated UHD Graphics 750, which the i9-11900F lacks. For a system that requires a display output without a discrete GPU, the i5-11500 is the only viable option of the two. However, for any user with a dedicated graphics card, the i9-11900F’s performance lead is substantial and consistent across all 17 benchmarks. The i5-11500 also has a lower boost clock and fewer cores, which explains its lower scores in both single and multi-threaded tests.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two processors differ according to the FACT PACK:

| Specification | Intel Core i5-11500 | Intel Core i9-11900F |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.70 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 | None |

| Launch MSRP | $192 | $422 |

| Part Number | SRKNY | SRKNK |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-11900F wins in every performance category recorded in the benchmark data. Its strongest relative advantage is in PassMark integer math (30.3% ahead) and floating-point math (29.1% ahead), making it the clear choice for scientific computing, financial modeling, and any workload that relies heavily on arithmetic throughput. The i9 also excels in data compression (24.9% ahead) and encryption (22.3% ahead), which benefits file archiving, database operations, and secure communications.

In rendering and content creation, the i9-11900F’s lead is consistent across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, with all multi-core tests showing a 22.6% advantage. This makes it the better pick for video encoding, 3D rendering, and other tasks that scale with core count. The i9 also wins in PassMark multi-thread (22.6% ahead) and physics (13.3% ahead), indicating better performance in simulation and gaming physics.

The Intel Core i5-11500’s only unique win is the presence of integrated UHD Graphics 750. This means it is the preferred choice for a build that must operate without a discrete GPU, such as a basic office machine or a troubleshooting system. The i5 also has a higher base clock (2.70 GHz vs 2.50 GHz), though this does not translate into a benchmark win, as the i9’s higher boost clock more than compensates. For any user with a discrete GPU, the i9-11900F’s 22.6% to 30.3% performance advantage across the board makes it the superior processor in every measured workload.