Intel Core i5-9600KF vs Intel Core i7-11370H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between these two Intel processors is unusually lopsided, but the single win for the desktop part is a significant one. The Intel Core i5-9600KF takes only one of the eight direct head-to-head comparisons, yet that victory comes in Geekbench multicore, where it scores 6184 against the i7-11370H's 5485, a 12.7% advantage. This suggests the six-core desktop chip sustains heavy parallel workloads better than the mobile part's four-core, eight-thread configuration.

The Intel Core i7-11370H dominates everywhere else. It wins seven of the eight direct comparisons, including every Cinebench test across R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multicore modes. The margins are consistent, hovering around 7.6% to 7.9% in the Cinebench suite. It also edges out the i5-9600KF in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1667 versus 1595, a 4.3% gap. The data paints a clear picture: the newer Tiger Lake architecture simply outperforms the older Coffee Lake design in most measurable scenarios, despite having fewer physical cores.

Looking at broader database positions, the two chips sit nearly side by side. The i5-9600KF holds a 52nd percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the i7-11370H sits at the 51st percentile. Their average benchmark scores are also close, with the desktop part at 2935 and the mobile part at 2861. This near-equality in overall standing makes the head-to-head results even more striking, as the mobile chip's superiority in the direct comparisons does not translate into a higher aggregate ranking.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental design philosophies diverge sharply here. The i5-9600KF is a 14 nm Coffee Lake desktop processor, built for Intel Socket 1151, with six cores and six threads. It has no hyper-threading, meaning each core handles exactly one thread. The i7-11370H, by contrast, is a 10 nm Tiger Lake-H mobile chip on Intel BGA 1449, with four cores and eight threads, using hyper-threading to double the thread count. The process node difference is significant, with the 10 nm design enabling higher efficiency in a smaller die area, measured at 146.1 mm².

Cache layouts reveal another generational leap. The i5-9600KF provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3. The i7-11370H offers 80 KB of L1 per core, a much larger 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The mobile chip's larger per-core L2 cache is particularly notable, as it allows more data to stay closer to the processing units, reducing latency in repeated access patterns.

Clock speeds tell a mixed story. The i5-9600KF has a higher base clock at 3.70 GHz, but the i7-11370H reaches a higher boost clock at 4.80 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. The power envelope is starkly different, with the desktop part rated at 95 W TDP and the mobile part at just 28 W TDP. This efficiency gap is a direct result of the newer 10 nm process and the mobile design target. The i5-9600KF also lacks integrated graphics entirely, while the i7-11370H includes Iris XE 96EU graphics, making it a complete package for systems without a discrete GPU.

Memory bandwidth favors the mobile chip, with 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s for the desktop part, despite both using dual-channel DDR4. PCIe support also differs, with the i5-9600KF offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes and the i7-11370H providing Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The newer standard doubles the theoretical bandwidth per lane, giving the mobile chip a connectivity advantage that matters for fast SSDs and external devices. The i5-9600KF has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, while the i7-11370H is locked.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are remarkably uniform in their margins. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-11370H scores 987 against the i5-9600KF's 911, a 7.7% lead. The single-core R15 test shows 139 versus 128, a 7.9% gap. Moving to R20, the multicore result is 4113 against 3799, a 7.6% difference, and single-core is 580 versus 536, again 7.6%. The R23 suite repeats the pattern: multicore 9793 versus 9047, single-core 1382 versus 1277, both showing a 7.6% margin. These consistent deltas across different workload generations suggest a stable architectural advantage rather than a test-specific anomaly.

The Geekbench results break the pattern. In multicore, the i5-9600KF surges ahead with 6184 points, leaving the i7-11370H at 5485, a substantial 12.7% lead. This is the only test where the desktop chip wins, and it does so decisively. The six physical cores likely provide better scaling in Geekbench's parallel workload, which may not benefit as much from hyper-threading as from additional dedicated cores. In single-core Geekbench, the i7-11370H takes a narrower 4.3% lead, scoring 1667 versus 1595.

The 3DMark results for the i7-11370H provide additional context, though no direct comparison exists for the i5-9600KF. The mobile chip scores 3583 in 16-thread tests, 1630 in 2-thread, 2640 in 4-thread, 3564 in 8-thread, 3588 in max-thread, and 896 in single-thread. The near-identical scores between 8-thread and 16-thread tests (3564 and 3583) confirm that the chip's eight threads are fully utilized, with no additional benefit from higher thread counts.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-9600KF | Intel Core i7-11370H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 4 |

| Threads | 6 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | Intel BGA 1449 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Tiger Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 146.1 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 9 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes | Gen 4, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Iris XE 96EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2019-01-07 | 2021-01-10 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | BX80684I59600KFBXC80684I5960KFSRFAD | SRKH5 |

The i7-11370H carries a launch MSRP of $426. The i5-9600KF has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-9600KF has 6 physical cores, while the Intel Core i7-11370H has 4 physical cores.

Q: How does the thread count compare between the two?

A: The i5-9600KF has 6 threads, matching its core count with no hyper-threading. The i7-11370H has 8 threads, double its core count through hyper-threading.

Q: Which chip is faster in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The Intel Core i7-11370H scores 9793 in Cinebench R23 multicore, beating the i5-9600KF's 9047 by 7.6%.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the i5-9600KF wins?

A: Yes, in Geekbench multicore the i5-9600KF scores 6184 versus 5485 for the i7-11370H, a 12.7% advantage.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The i5-9600KF has a TDP of 95 W, while the i7-11370H has a much lower TDP of 28 W.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 4?

A: The Intel Core i7-11370H supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The i5-9600KF is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

The Verdict

The data directs different users toward different chips based on workload priorities. For single-threaded performance and overall efficiency, the i7-11370H is the clear choice. It wins every Cinebench test, both single-core and multicore, with consistent 7.6% to 7.9% margins. Its higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz, larger cache hierarchy, and newer 10 nm process deliver measurable advantages in these synthetic workloads. The 28 W TDP also makes it suitable for thin and light laptops, whereas the 95 W desktop part demands substantial cooling.

The i5-9600KF makes its case in Geekbench multicore, where its 12.7% lead indicates that certain parallel workloads favor additional physical cores over hyper-threaded ones. For users running applications that scale well with true core count, the six-core design may offer better real-world performance in that specific scenario. The unlocked multiplier also appeals to enthusiasts who want manual overclocking headroom, a feature entirely absent from the locked mobile chip.

The overall database rankings show the two chips are nearly equivalent, with the i5-9600KF at the 52nd percentile and the i7-11370H at the 51st percentile. Their average scores differ by only 74 points out of roughly 2900. This suggests that for general purpose computing, either processor would deliver similar aggregate performance. The deciding factors come down to platform, power budget, and specific workload patterns. Desktop builders with existing LGA 1151 boards and a preference for overclocking should consider the i5-9600KF. Laptop buyers or those prioritizing efficiency and the latest features should choose the i7-11370H. The production status also matters, with the i5-9600KF marked end-of-life while the i7-11370H remains active.