Intel Core i7-10700K vs Intel Core i7-11700F Comparison

The Intel Core i7-10700K and Intel Core i7-11700F are both 8-core, 16-thread desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1200 platform, yet benchmark results show they are far from interchangeable. The data reveals a decisive generational shift: the 11700F wins 20 of 25 head-to-head comparisons, while the 10700K manages only 5 victories. This split is not random; it follows a clear pattern of architectural priorities, with the newer Rocket Lake part dominating in most compute-heavy tasks but losing ground in specific memory-sensitive or legacy workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head results is the consistency of the 11700F’s victory margin. Across the entire Cinebench suite, the 11700F leads by exactly 10.8% in every single test, whether single-core or multi-core. Specifically, the 10700K scores 1,585 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 1,777 for the 11700F, and in R23 multi-core the gap widens to 15,727 versus 17,633. This uniformity suggests a fundamental per-clock efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Single-threaded performance tells a similar story, though with more variation. In 3DMark single-thread, the 11700F posts a 12.7% advantage (823 vs 943), while in Geekbench single-core the lead is 10% (1,701 vs 1,891). The 11700F also wins PassMark single-thread by 6.7% (3,043 vs 3,262). These results point to the Rocket Lake core design being substantially stronger on a per-thread basis, despite the 10700K having a higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz compared to 4.90 GHz.

Multi-threaded workloads generally favor the 11700F, but not universally. The 11700F leads by 10.8% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (7,405 vs 6,605) and by 10.2% in PassMark multithread (20,728 vs 18,609). However, the 10700K wins the 3DMark 8-thread test by 2.1% (5,628 vs 5,513), a curious outlier that hints at different scaling behavior under moderate thread counts. The 11700F reclaims the lead in 16-thread (7,378 vs 7,277) and max-thread (7,479 vs 7,266) tests, but by much smaller margins of 1.4% and 2.8% respectively.

The 10700K’s other wins are concentrated in specific PassMark sub-tests. Its most decisive victory is in random string sorting, where it beats the 11700F by 20.1% (36,633 vs 30,498). It also wins data compression by 11% (295,418 vs 266,035), extended instructions by 5.9% (19,387 vs 18,308), and physics by 5.4% (933 vs 885). These wins suggest that the Comet Lake architecture retains strengths in memory-latency-sensitive or legacy instruction workloads, even as it loses ground in raw arithmetic throughput.

The single largest margin in either direction belongs to the 11700F in data encryption, where it scores 12,563 versus 6,468 for the 10700K—a massive 48.5% advantage. This is not a small edge; it is a near-doubling of performance, indicating a significant acceleration in the encryption instruction set on Rocket Lake. Integer math also favors the 11700F by 15.8% (79,133 vs 66,642), and floating-point math by 10.8% (46,307 vs 41,306).

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on the same 14 nm process node at Intel’s foundry, but they represent distinct microarchitectures. The 10700K is Comet Lake, while the 11700F is Rocket Lake. This generational leap explains much of the benchmark divergence. The 10700K has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, whereas the 11700F runs at a lower 2.50 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost. Despite the lower clocks, the 11700F wins most tests, confirming that IPC (instructions per clock) improvements on Rocket Lake more than compensate for the clock deficit.

Cache configurations differ notably per core. The 10700K carries 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, while the 11700F has 80 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 per core. Both share 16 MB of L3, but the larger L2 on the 11700F likely contributes to its efficiency in repeated-workload scenarios. The 11700F also has a larger die size at 276 mm², though the 10700K’s die size is not listed.

Memory bandwidth is another differentiator. The 11700F supports 51.2 GB/s, while the 10700K is rated at 46.9 GB/s. Both support dual-channel DDR4 and do not support ECC memory. PCIe capabilities also differ: the 10700K offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 11700F provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes. This makes the 11700F more future-proof for high-bandwidth storage and GPUs, though benchmark data does not isolate this impact.

Feature differences extend to integrated graphics. The 10700K includes UHD Graphics 630, while the 11700F has no integrated graphics at all. The 10700K also has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the 11700F is locked, meaning the K-series part is designed for overclocking. The 11700F has a TDP of 65 W versus 125 W for the 10700K, a significant power efficiency advantage that does not come at the cost of performance in most tests. Production status also differs: the 10700K is listed as Active, while the 11700F is End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The 11700F is the clear winner for anyone prioritizing raw compute throughput. It dominates Cinebench across all versions, wins Geekbench multi-core (9,680 vs 9,430) and single-core (1,891 vs 1,701), and leads in PassMark integer math, floating-point math, multithread, and single-thread tests. For rendering, video encoding, scientific simulation, or any heavily threaded workload, the data consistently points to the 11700F. Its 48.5% lead in data encryption also makes it the obvious choice for security-related tasks, disk encryption, or VPN software.

The 10700K’s wins are more specialized but still meaningful. Its 20.1% lead in random string sorting suggests it handles certain text-processing or database-style workloads better. The 11% advantage in data compression could benefit file archiving or backup software. The 5.9% win in extended instructions and 5.4% win in physics are smaller but indicate that some legacy or AVX-related workloads still prefer Comet Lake. The 2.1% win in 3DMark 8-thread is notable for gaming scenarios that use up to 8 threads, though the 11700F wins the 2-thread, 4-thread, 16-thread, and max-thread variants.

The 11700F also wins on power efficiency. With a 65 W TDP versus 125 W for the 10700K, it delivers higher performance while drawing less power. This makes it the better choice for compact builds, lower-noise systems, or any scenario where thermal headroom is a concern. The lack of integrated graphics on the 11700F is a non-issue if a discrete GPU is already planned, and the PCIe Gen 4 support provides additional bandwidth for modern components.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-11700F is the superior processor in 20 of 25 comparisons, and its wins are often by substantial margins. The 10.8% lead across every Cinebench test, the 48.5% lead in encryption, and the 15.8% lead in integer math make it the default recommendation for users who want maximum performance from the Intel Socket 1200 platform. The 10700K retains value only in narrow niches—data compression, random string sorting, and 8-thread gaming—where its wins are real but limited in scope.

Users who already own a 10700K and are considering an upgrade should note the 11700F’s consistent advantages, but the 10700K’s unlocked multiplier and active production status may appeal to overclockers. The 11700F’s locked multiplier and end-of-life status are drawbacks for those who plan to push their hardware manually. However, for a drop-in replacement that runs cooler and faster out of the box, the 11700F is the data-driven choice. The 10700K is only preferable for specific workloads where its niche wins matter more than the broad performance lead of its successor.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has better single-threaded performance?

A: The 11700F wins all single-thread tests, including 3DMark single-thread by 12.7% (943 vs 823), Geekbench single-core by 10% (1,891 vs 1,701), and Cinebench R23 single-core by 10.8% (2,489 vs 2,220).

Q: Is the 10700K better for gaming?

A: The 10700K wins the 3DMark 8-thread test by 2.1% (5,628 vs 5,513), but the 11700F wins 2-thread (1,816 vs 1,622), 4-thread (3,355 vs 3,171), 16-thread (7,378 vs 7,277), and max-thread (7,479 vs 7,266) tests, suggesting better overall gaming performance.

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

A: The largest difference is in PassMark data encryption, where the 11700F scores 12,563 versus 6,468 for the 10700K, a 48.5% advantage.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory?

A: Yes, both support dual-channel DDR4 without ECC, but the 11700F has higher memory bandwidth at 51.2 GB/s versus 46.9 GB/s for the 10700K.

Q: Does the 10700K have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes UHD Graphics 630, while the 11700F has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: Which CPU is more power efficient?

A: The 11700F has a TDP of 65 W, while the 10700K is rated at 125 W, making the 11700F significantly more power-efficient despite higher benchmark scores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-10700K | Intel Core i7-11700F |

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

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 65 W |

| Architecture / Codename | Comet Lake | Rocket Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 14 nm |

| Die Size | Not listed | 276 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache (per core) | 256 KB | 512 KB |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 46.9 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | None |

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

| Release Date | 2020-04-29 | 2021-03-15 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $298 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SRH72 | SRKNR |