Intel Core i5-11600KF vs Intel Core i7-10700 Comparison

The Intel Core i5-11600KF and Intel Core i7-10700 are both 14 nm desktop parts for the Intel Socket 1200 platform, but they represent two different generations of Intel design. The i5-11600KF is a 6-core, 12-thread Rocket Lake processor with a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the i7-10700 is an 8-core, 16-thread Comet Lake chip running at 2.90 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The benchmark database records 20 wins for the i5-11600KF and 5 wins for the i7-10700 across the head-to-head suite, yet the average benchmark scores are close: 19723 for the i5 versus 19145 for the i7. Both CPUs sit at the 73rd percentile among all processors in the database, and each falls within roughly 1% of its nearest rivals, so this comparison is about where specific workloads tilt the balance.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-11600KF dominates in single-thread and lightly threaded work. Its 3dmark_single_thread score of 962 beats the i7-10700's 793 by 21.3%, and its 3dmark_2_threads result of 1861 is 18.9% higher than the i7's 1565. The i5 also wins in 4-thread and 8-thread 3dmark tests, by 16.6% and 5.9% respectively. This pattern extends to Cinebench single-core tests, where the i5 leads by roughly 51% in R15, R20, and R23 single-core runs. Anything that depends on fast response from one or two cores, such as older games, lightly threaded productivity tools, or everyday desktop interaction, favors the i5-11600KF.

The i7-10700 takes the opposite side of the ledger in heavily threaded, memory-latency-sensitive, or integer-heavy scenarios. Its 3dmark_16_threads score of 6465 is 3.5% higher than the i5's 6237, and its 3dmark_max_threads result of 6719 beats the i5's 6240 by 7.1%. The i7 also wins passmark_data_compression (252113 versus 242730, a 3.7% edge), passmark_floating_point_math (38823 versus 38129, 1.8% ahead), and passmark_random_string_sorting (31585 versus 27767, a 12.1% margin). These wins point to workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth, such as compression, sorting, or number crunching that can use all available threads.

The i5-11600KF claims the middle ground too. In passmark_multithread it scores 19513 versus the i7's 16161, a 20.7% advantage, and it wins passmark_physics by 20.2% (954 versus 794). Geekbench multicore shows a massive 70.6% lead for the i5 (8688 versus 5092), which suggests that despite having fewer cores, the i5's architecture extracts much more throughput per thread in that test. The i5 also wins passmark_integer_math by 1.9% (64195 versus 62988), passmark_find_prime_numbers by 25.5% (59 versus 47), and passmark_extended_instructions by 9% (17619 versus 16160).

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 14 nm process, but the underlying designs differ significantly. The i5-11600KF uses the Rocket Lake architecture and carries the Rocket Lake-S codename, while the i7-10700 is Comet Lake. Rocket Lake is a newer core design for the 11th Gen family, and the recorded data shows it delivers substantially higher per-clock performance, especially in single-thread tests.

The cache layouts diverge. The i5-11600KF has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3. The i7-10700 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but a larger 16 MB of shared L3. The i7's extra L3 helps in some shared-data workloads, but the i5's larger per-core L1 and L2 likely contribute to its single-thread advantage.

Memory bandwidth differs as well: the i5-11600KF supports 51.2 GB/s of dual-channel DDR4 bandwidth, while the i7-10700 is rated at 46.9 GB/s. Both support DDR4 and dual-channel memory, and neither supports ECC. PCIe capabilities are a clear differentiator: the i5-11600KF provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the i7-10700 is limited to Gen 3 with 16 lanes. That makes the i5 the better match for a Gen 4 SSD or a current GPU that can use the extra bandwidth.

The i7-10700 includes integrated UHD Graphics 630, whereas the i5-11600KF has no integrated graphics, as indicated by the "KF" suffix. The i5-11600KF has an unlocked multiplier, making it a candidate for overclocking, while the i7-10700's multiplier is locked. The i5-11600KF is listed as end-of-life production status with a launch MSRP of $237, while the i7-10700 is still active in the database. The i5 also has a 125 W TDP compared to the i7's 65 W TDP, which reflects the i5's higher clocks and more aggressive power profile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i5-11600KF's biggest wins are staggering in scale. In Geekbench multicore, the i5 scores 8688 against the i7's 5092, a 70.6% lead. Cinebench R23 multicore sees the i5 at 16503 versus 10910, a 51.3% advantage, and Cinebench R20 multicore is equally lopsided at 6931 versus 4582 (51.3%). Cinebench R15 multicore shows 1663 versus 1099, also 51.3%. The i5's single-core leads are similarly large: Cinebench R20 single-core is 978 versus 646 (51.4%), R23 single-core is 2329 versus 1540 (51.2%), and R15 single-core is 234 versus 155 (51%).

Passmark data encryption is the single largest percentage win for the i5: 12198 versus 5379, a 126.8% advantage. This suggests the i5's Rocket Lake cores include significantly stronger cryptographic instruction throughput. Passmark find_prime_numbers also favors the i5 heavily at 25.5% (59 versus 47), and passmark_physics shows a 20.2% edge (954 versus 794). Passmark single_thread is 3327 versus 2891, a 15.1% lead.

The i7-10700's wins are smaller in percentage but still meaningful. Its best result is passmark_random_string_sorting at 31585 versus 27767, a 12.1% margin. In 3dmark_max_threads it leads 6719 versus 6240 (7.1%), and in 3dmark_16_threads it leads 6465 versus 6237 (3.5%). Passmark_data_compression goes to the i7 by 3.7% (252113 versus 242730), and passmark_floating_point_math is close at 38823 versus 38129 (1.8%). These are the workloads where the i7's two extra cores and larger 16 MB L3 cache overcome the i5's higher per-core performance.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The Intel Core i5-11600KF wins every single-thread test in the database. It leads by 21.3% in 3dmark_single_thread (962 versus 793) and by roughly 51% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 single-core tests.

Q: Does the i7-10700 ever beat the i5-11600KF?

A: Yes, but only in a handful of workloads. The i7-10700 wins 3dmark_16_threads by 3.5%, 3dmark_max_threads by 7.1%, passmark_data_compression by 3.7%, passmark_floating_point_math by 1.8%, and passmark_random_string_sorting by 12.1%.

Q: Why does the i5-11600KF win in multicore tests despite having fewer cores?

A: The i5-11600KF has 6 cores and 12 threads versus the i7-10700's 8 cores and 16 threads, but its Rocket Lake architecture delivers much higher per-core throughput. In Geekbench multicore, the i5 scores 8688 versus 5092 (70.6% ahead), and in Cinebench R23 multicore it scores 16503 versus 10910 (51.3% ahead).

Q: Which CPU supports PCIe Gen 4?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-11600KF supports PCIe Gen 4, with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Intel Core i7-10700 is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

Q: Do both CPUs support overclocking?

A: No. The i5-11600KF has an unlocked multiplier, so it can be overclocked. The i7-10700 has a locked multiplier and cannot.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The i7-10700 includes UHD Graphics 630, while the i5-11600KF has no integrated graphics at all.

Specification Differences

The two processors share the same Intel Socket 1200, 14 nm process node, and dual-channel DDR4 memory support, but nearly every other specification differs. The i5-11600KF has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i7-10700 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.90 GHz for the i5 and 2.90 GHz for the i7; boost clocks are 4.90 GHz and 4.80 GHz respectively. The i5 has a 125 W TDP, the i7 has a 65 W TDP.

Cache configurations differ: the i5 has 80 KB L1 per core and 512 KB L2 per core with 12 MB shared L3, while the i7 has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core with 16 MB shared L3. Memory bandwidth is 51.2 GB/s for the i5 and 46.9 GB/s for the i7. PCIe support is Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the i5 versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the i7.

Integrated graphics are absent on the i5-11600KF but present on the i7-10700 as UHD Graphics 630. The i5 has an unlocked multiplier, the i7 does not. Production status also differs: the i5-11600KF is end-of-life, while the i7-10700 is active. The i5-11600KF has a launch MSRP of $237, and the i7-10700 has no recorded launch MSRP. The i5-11600KF is from the Core 11th Gen series with the Rocket Lake architecture, while the i7-10700 is from the Core 10th Gen series with the Comet Lake architecture.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core i5-11600KF as the stronger overall processor for most buyers. It wins 20 of the 25 head-to-head comparisons, including every Cinebench test, every Geekbench test, and the majority of Passmark tests. Its single-thread dominance is decisive: 21.3% ahead in 3dmark_single_thread and about 51% ahead in all three Cinebench single-core runs. For gaming, general productivity, and any software that rewards high per-core performance, the i5-11600KF is the clear pick.

The i7-10700 still has a role. Its 8 cores and 16 threads give it an edge in 3dmark_16_threads and 3dmark_max_threads, and it wins passmark_random_string_sorting by 12.1% and passmark_data_compression by 3.7%. If the workload is heavily threaded, uses lots of shared cache, or involves sorting and compression, the i7-10700's larger 16 MB L3 and extra cores matter. The i7 also includes integrated graphics, which is useful for a system without a discrete GPU, and it has a lower 65 W TDP.

The i5-11600KF counters with PCIe Gen 4 support, a 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth rating, an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and a massive lead in encryption workloads (126.8% in passmark_data_encryption). Its average benchmark score of 19723 is higher than the i7's 19145, and both CPUs sit at the 73rd percentile. Given the i5's wins in the most common productivity and content-creation benchmarks, it is the recommended choice for most builds. The i7-10700 is the pick only for specific multi-threaded tasks where its extra cores and cache produce measurable wins.