Intel Core i5-11600K vs Intel Core i5-11600KF Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11600K and Intel Core i5-11600KF are nearly identical processors, with the data showing a 0.3% average benchmark score difference in favor of the 11600K (19786 vs 19723). The core distinction is the presence of integrated graphics on the 11600K, while the 11600KF omits it, which is reflected in the part numbers and a launch MSRP of $262 for the K and $237 for the KF. Benchmark results indicate the 11600K wins 22 of 25 head-to-head comparisons, though most margins are under 1%, making the choice largely dependent on whether the iGPU is needed.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for most buyers: the Intel Core i5-11600KF is the more rational pick, provided a discrete graphics card is already in the system. The 11600K’s average benchmark score of 19786 is only 0.3% higher than the 11600KF’s 19723, a difference that falls within run-to-run noise. Both CPUs share the same 6-core, 12-thread configuration, identical 3.90 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost clocks, and the same 125W TDP, so raw compute capability is effectively equal.

However, the 11600K includes UHD Graphics 750, while the 11600KF has no integrated graphics. For a system builder with a dedicated GPU, the KF’s lower launch MSRP of $237 versus $262 for the K makes it the logical choice. The 11600K is for users who need a fallback display output for troubleshooting or who plan to use Intel Quick Sync for media encoding without a discrete card. The 11600KF wins in passmark_find_prime_numbers (59 vs 58) and passmark_physics (954 vs 944), but these are minor reversals that do not shift the overall performance picture.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Rocket Lake architecture, manufactured on Intel’s 14 nm process node, with a die size of 276 mm². They share the same Intel Socket 1200, support DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, and offer Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes from the CPU. The core and thread counts are identical at 6 cores and 12 threads, and both have 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

The key architectural divergence appears in the L2 cache. The 11600K lists 256 KB per core, while the 11600KF lists 512 KB per core. This is a notable discrepancy in the specification data, yet benchmark results do not show a corresponding performance advantage for the KF. In fact, the 11600K leads in most cache-sensitive tests like cinebench_r23_multicore (16552 vs 16503) and 3dmark_16_threads (6247 vs 6237), suggesting the L2 difference may be a reporting artifact or has minimal real-world impact at these workloads. The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core for both.

The most visible architectural difference is the integrated graphics: the 11600K ships with UHD Graphics 750, while the 11600KF has a null iGPU. This is the primary functional distinction and the reason for the price gap. Both processors have an unlocked multiplier, are marked as end-of-life, and share the same release date of 2021-03-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 11600K dominates the head-to-head results, winning 22 of 25 tests. The largest margin is in geekbench_multicore, where the 11600K scores 9238 against the 11600KF’s 8688, a 6.3% advantage. The geekbench_singlecore test also shows a meaningful gap: 1973 vs 1904, a 3.6% lead for the K. These are the only tests where the delta exceeds 1%, suggesting the K has a measurable edge in Geekbench’s workload mix.

Elsewhere, the differences are narrow. In 3dmark tests, the K leads by 0.2% to 0.6% across thread counts, with the 8-thread test showing 5268 vs 5238. Cinebench results are consistently close: R23 multicore is 16552 vs 16503 (0.3%), and R20 multicore is 6951 vs 6931 (0.3%). Single-core Cinebench scores are nearly tied at 235 vs 234 for R15 and 981 vs 978 for R20.

PassMark tests show a similar pattern. The K wins integer math by 0.7% (64664 vs 64195) and floating point math by 0.4% (38269 vs 38129), but the KF takes passmark_find_prime_numbers (59 vs 58, a -1.7% delta for the K) and passmark_physics (954 vs 944, -1% for the K). The extended instructions test is essentially tied at 17615 vs 17619. The KF’s wins are isolated and do not indicate a systemic advantage.

Specification Differences

The specification tables reveal only a few fields where the two processors differ. The most important is integratedGraphics: the 11600K has UHD Graphics 750, while the 11600KF has a null entry. This is the defining hardware difference and explains the part number suffix.

The L2 cache is listed differently: 256 KB per core for the 11600K versus 512 KB per core for the 11600KF. This is the only cache field that varies; L1 (80 KB per core) and L3 (12 MB shared) are identical. The launch MSRP differs as well, with the 11600K at $262 and the 11600KF at $237.

The part numbers are distinct (SRKNU for the K, SRKNV for the KF), but every other specification matches: 6 cores, 12 threads, 3.90 GHz base clock, 4.90 GHz boost clock, 125W TDP, Intel Socket 1200, Rocket Lake architecture, 14 nm process, 276 mm² die size, DDR4 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, no ECC support, Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes, desktop market segment, end-of-life production status, and a 2021-03-15 release date. Both have an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The 11600K leads in most multi-threaded tests, including cinebench_r23_multicore (16552 vs 16503), 3dmark_max_threads (6270 vs 6240), and passmark_multithread (19527 vs 19513). The margins range from 0.1% to 0.5%, making the K slightly faster but not decisively so.

Q: Does the 11600KF have integrated graphics?

A: No. The 11600KF lists null for integratedGraphics, while the 11600K includes UHD Graphics 750. This is the primary functional difference between the two.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in geekbench_multicore, where the 11600K scores 9238 versus 8688 for the 11600KF, a 6.3% advantage. The geekbench_singlecore test shows a 3.6% lead for the K (1973 vs 1904).

Q: Are there any tests where the 11600KF wins?

A: Yes, the 11600KF wins 3 of 25 head-to-head tests: passmark_extended_instructions (17619 vs 17615), passmark_find_prime_numbers (59 vs 58), and passmark_physics (954 vs 944). These wins are marginal.

Q: Do both processors have the same clock speeds?

A: Yes, both have a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. They also share the same 125W TDP and 6-core, 12-thread configuration.

Q: Which processor is better for a system without a discrete GPU?

A: The 11600K is the only option of the two, as it includes UHD Graphics 750. The 11600KF has no integrated graphics and will not produce a display output without a separate graphics card.

Where Each One Wins

The 11600K wins in the broad majority of scenarios based on benchmark data. Its advantages are most pronounced in Geekbench tests, where it leads by 6.3% in multicore and 3.6% in single-core, making it the better choice for applications that reflect Geekbench’s workload characteristics. It also edges out the KF in every 3dmark test, from 0.2% in the 2-thread test (1861 vs 1861) to 0.6% in the 4-thread (3512 vs 3492) and 8-thread (5268 vs 5238) tests, suggesting a slight edge in synthetic gaming and graphics-related workloads. For Cinebench rendering tasks, the K consistently leads by 0.3% across R15, R20, and R23 in both single and multi-core runs, making it the pick for content creation tasks that rely on those engines.

The 11600KF’s wins are narrow and isolated. It takes passmark_physics (954 vs 944) and passmark_find_prime_numbers (59 vs 58), which could indicate a slight advantage in physics simulation or prime-number finding workloads, but the 1% to 1.7% deltas are within noise. Its only other win is passmark_extended_instructions at 17619 vs 17615, which is effectively a tie. The KF’s real advantage is not in performance but in cost: a $25 lower launch MSRP and the absence of an iGPU that is unnecessary in a build with a dedicated graphics card.

For users who already own a discrete GPU, the 11600KF is the sensible choice—the benchmark data shows no meaningful performance penalty, and the cost savings are clear. For users who need a fallback display output or plan to use the CPU’s integrated graphics, the 11600K is the only option that provides it. The data does not support choosing the KF for its L2 cache advantage, as the K’s benchmark wins suggest the larger cache on the KF does not translate to real-world gains.