Intel Core i5-11600 vs Intel Core i7-1360P Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11600 and Intel Core i7-1360P represent two distinct Intel design philosophies: a desktop part built for sustained heavy loads versus a mobile processor engineered for efficiency within thermal constraints. The benchmark data reveals a split decision, where the older desktop chip wins the most demanding sustained multi-core render test, while the newer mobile chip dominates in most other measured workloads. For a desktop user prioritizing long-form rendering, the i5-11600 is the data-backed choice; for nearly everything else, particularly single-threaded responsiveness and math-heavy tasks, the i7-1360P holds the advantage.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but nuanced picture. The Intel Core i7-1360P wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-11600 wins only 5. However, the magnitude of the i5-11600’s victories is significant. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-11600 scores 15269 against the i7-1360P’s 11266.5, a 35.5% lead. This is a substantial margin that indicates the desktop chip’s superior sustained multi-core capability. Conversely, the i7-1360P’s wins are often narrower, such as its 1.8% lead in Cinebench R20 multi-core (6530 vs 6412) and its 3.8% lead in PassMark multi-thread (18632 vs 17918).

The overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the i5-11600 at 24563 and the i7-1360P at 24344. The i5-11600 also holds a slightly higher percentile ranking at 77 versus the i7-1360P’s 76. This suggests that for general mixed-use workloads, the two processors are functionally equivalent in overall performance, despite their architectural differences. The i5-11600’s nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-12450HX, scores 24576, a delta of only -0.1%, indicating it sits in a tightly contested performance tier. The i7-1360P is similarly matched with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 6650H at 24364, a -0.1% delta.

For the desktop builder, the i5-11600 is the pick when sustained all-core loads are the primary concern, as evidenced by its massive Cinebench R23 lead. For a mobile user, the i7-1360P is the pick due to its superior performance in most other tests, its active production status, and its inclusion of integrated graphics. The i7-1360P’s wins in PassMark physics (1280 vs 891, a 30.4% lead) and floating-point math (45997 vs 35478, a 22.9% lead) show that it is not merely a low-power chip; it is genuinely faster in several compute-heavy tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 15269, which is 35.5% higher than the i7-1360P’s score of 11266.5.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-1360P. It wins the Cinebench R15 single-core test with a score of 258 against the i5-11600’s 217, a 15.9% difference. It also leads in Cinebench R20 single-core (921 vs 905) and PassMark single-thread (3461 vs 3284).

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600 has a TDP of 65 watts, while the Intel Core i7-1360P has a much lower TDP of 28 watts. This reflects the i5-11600’s desktop design versus the i7-1360P’s mobile-focused engineering.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The i5-11600 supports only DDR4 memory, while the i7-1360P supports both DDR4 and DDR5. This makes the i7-1360P more flexible for future system builds that may utilize newer memory standards.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-1360P has 12 cores and 16 threads, whereas the Intel Core i5-11600 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The i7-1360P’s core count is double that of the i5-11600.

Q: Which CPU is better for integer math performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-1360P. In the PassMark integer math test, it scores 67963, which is 11.5% higher than the i5-11600’s score of 60158.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on different architectural foundations. The Intel Core i5-11600 is based on the Rocket Lake architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process node. In contrast, the Intel Core i7-1360P uses the newer Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node. This process difference is a key factor in the i7-1360P’s much lower 28-watt TDP compared to the i5-11600’s 65-watt TDP.

The core configurations differ significantly. The i5-11600 is a traditional desktop part with 6 cores and 12 threads. The i7-1360P, a mobile part, has 12 cores and 16 threads, indicating a hybrid architecture with a mix of performance and efficiency cores. The cache hierarchy also diverges. While both have an 80 KB L1 cache per core, the i5-11600 has a 512 KB L2 cache per core, whereas the i7-1360P has a 2 MB L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache is also larger on the i7-1360P at 18 MB, compared to 12 MB on the i5-11600. This larger cache pool on the i7-1360P likely contributes to its performance in memory-sensitive tasks.

The i7-1360P includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the i5-11600 has no integrated graphics listed. This makes the i7-1360P a self-contained mobile solution. The i5-11600 is an end-of-life product, released on 2021-03-15, while the i7-1360P is active, with a release date of 2023-01-03. The die size of the i5-11600 is 276 mm², while no die size is listed for the i7-1360P. The i5-11600 uses an Intel Socket 1200, while the i7-1360P uses the BGA 1744 socket, which is typically soldered onto the motherboard in mobile systems.

Specification Differences

The specifications of the two CPUs differ across several key fields. The i5-11600 has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The i7-1360P has a lower base clock of 2.20 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The higher boost clock on the i7-1360P helps explain its single-thread performance wins.

The memory support is a major differentiator. The i5-11600 supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The i7-1360P supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also on a dual-channel bus, though its memory bandwidth is not listed. The PCIe support is identical: both offer Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The TDP is another significant difference, as noted: 65 watts for the i5-11600 versus 28 watts for the i7-1360P. The market segment also differs, with the i5-11600 being a desktop part and the i7-1360P being a mobile part. The production status is also different, with the i5-11600 marked as end-of-life and the i7-1360P marked as active. The part numbers are SRKNW for the i5-11600 and SRMJ8 for the i7-1360P. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite provides the most stark contrast. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-11600 wins decisively with a 35.5% lead (15269 vs 11266.5). This is the single largest delta in the entire benchmark set. However, in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the i7-1360P wins with a 17.2% lead (1858 vs 1538). This discrepancy suggests that the i5-11600’s performance scales better in the R23 workload, which is more demanding and longer-running, highlighting the benefit of the desktop chip’s higher power envelope. The i7-1360P wins the Cinebench R20 multi-core test by a narrow 1.8% (6530 vs 6412).

The single-core Cinebench results favor the i7-1360P in R15 and R20, with leads of 15.9% (258 vs 217) and 1.7% (921 vs 905), respectively. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-11600 wins by 17.8% (2155 vs 1829). This pattern in R23 suggests that the i5-11600’s architecture is better optimized for the instruction set used in that specific test.

In the PassMark suite, the i7-1360P shows clear strengths in several areas. It wins floating-point math by 22.9% (45997 vs 35478), physics by 30.4% (1280 vs 891), and find prime numbers by 28.2% (78 vs 56). It also leads in integer math by 11.5% (67963 vs 60158) and data encryption by 11.3% (12463 vs 11060). The i7-1360P wins the PassMark multi-thread test by 3.8% (18632 vs 17918) and the single-thread test by 5.1% (3461 vs 3284).

The i5-11600 fights back in other PassMark tests. It wins data compression by 7% (218062 vs 203746), extended instructions by 35.5% (15698 vs 11581), and random string sorting by 11.8% (25178 vs 22522). The extended instructions result is particularly notable, matching the i5-11600’s biggest win margin from Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear use-case split. The Intel Core i5-11600 is the winner for scenarios requiring sustained, long-duration multi-core processing. Its 35.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the defining result, making it the superior choice for video rendering, 3D model rendering, and other content creation tasks that stress all cores for extended periods. Its wins in data compression and random string sorting also suggest strength in data manipulation and archival workloads. The i5-11600’s high TDP of 65 watts allows it to maintain high clock speeds under load, a critical advantage for these tasks.

The Intel Core i7-1360P is the winner for a broader range of general and mobile-centric tasks. Its performance in physics simulations (30.4% lead), floating-point math (22.9% lead), and integer math (11.5% lead) indicates it is a strong choice for scientific computing, financial modeling, and engineering applications. Its wins in single-thread tests (Cinebench R15 and R20, PassMark single-thread) show it excels at everyday responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications. The i7-1360P’s 28-watt TDP and integrated Iris Xe Graphics make it the only viable option for a laptop or other mobile form factor. The i7-1360P also wins the PassMark multi-thread test, suggesting that for many shorter, bursty multi-threaded tasks, it is faster than the i5-11600 despite losing the long-form R23 test.

In summary, the i5-11600 is a specialized tool for heavy, sustained multi-core workloads in a desktop. The i7-1360P is a generalist that wins more benchmarks overall and is designed for power-sensitive mobile environments, offering a better balance of performance and efficiency for a wider array of applications.