Intel Core i7-11390H vs Intel Core i7-9750HF Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits this comparison cleanly by workload type. The Intel Core i7-9750HF wins six of the eight head-to-head tests, all of them in Cinebench, with a consistent margin of roughly 5.5% across every Cinebench workload. The Intel Core i7-11390H wins the two Geekbench tests, and it does so decisively: 13.1% ahead in multi-core and 45.4% ahead in single-core. The verdict depends on which benchmark suite reflects the user's actual applications.

For users running rendering or CPU-heavy content creation tasks that resemble Cinebench, the Core i7-9750HF is the safer pick. Its six cores and twelve threads deliver a 5.5% advantage in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-threaded. The consistency of that margin across all six Cinebench tests suggests a structural advantage from the two additional physical cores, not a workload-specific quirk.

For users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness, general productivity, or applications that mirror Geekbench's mixed workload, the Core i7-11390H is the clear winner. Its 45.4% single-core lead in Geekbench is the largest margin in the entire comparison, and its 13.1% multi-core lead in the same suite shows that its Tiger Lake architecture can overcome a two-core deficit.

The Core i7-9750HF is end-of-life production status, while the Core i7-11390H remains active. The newer chip also carries integrated graphics, which the 9750HF lacks entirely. For a mobile platform where discrete graphics might not always be present, that difference matters.

The average benchmark scores place the 11390H at 2715 versus 2662 for the 9750HF, a 2% edge in the database's aggregate metric. Both sit at the 50th percentile among all CPUs. The 11390H's nearest rivals by average score include the Intel Xeon D-1577 (identical score), AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5650U (0.1% behind), and AMD Ryzen 7 4700U (0.2% ahead). The 9750HF's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E5-4650 v3 (0.1% behind) and Intel Core i7-9700T (0.2% behind). Neither chip dominates its peer group by a meaningful margin in aggregate terms.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i7-11390H boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-9750HF boosts to 4.50 GHz. The 11390H also has a higher base clock at 2.90 GHz versus 2.60 GHz.

Q: Does the Core i7-9750HF have integrated graphics?

A: No, the database lists no integrated graphics for the 9750HF. The Core i7-11390H includes Iris XE 96EU graphics.

Q: Which chip scores higher in Geekbench single-core?

A: The Core i7-11390H scores 1985 versus 1365 for the 9750HF, a 45.4% advantage. This is the largest single delta in the entire head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core i7-9750HF scores 8696, which is 5.5% ahead of the 11390H's 8218. The margin is identical to the other Cinebench tests.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core i7-9750HF has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Core i7-11390H has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the production status of each chip?

A: The Core i7-11390H is listed as Active, while the Core i7-9750HF is listed as End-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations with substantially different design priorities. The Core i7-11390H uses the Tiger Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the Core i7-9750HF uses the older Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the node difference explains much of the performance behavior seen in the benchmarks.

The 11390H is a 4-core, 8-thread part with a die size of 146.1 mm². The 9750HF is a 6-core, 12-thread part with a die size of 149 mm². Despite having two fewer cores, the 11390H's die is nearly identical in size, reflecting the denser 10 nm process and the inclusion of a larger integrated graphics unit. The 9750HF's die is slightly larger at 149 mm² despite the older 14 nm node, because it physically contains two more CPU cores.

Cache organization differs significantly. The 11390H provides 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 12 MB of shared L3. The 9750HF provides 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, also with 12 MB of shared L3. The 11390H's per-core L2 is five times larger, which contributes to its strong single-thread performance in Geekbench. Both chips share the same total L3 capacity.

The 11390H supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 9750HF only supports PCIe Gen 3. Memory bandwidth also favors the newer chip: 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s, though both use dual-channel DDR4. The 11390H includes Iris XE 96EU integrated graphics, while the 9750HF has no integrated graphics at all.

The 11390H uses the Intel BGA 1449 socket, while the 9750HF uses Intel BGA 1440. Both are mobile parts, but the socket difference means they are not drop-in interchangeable. The 11390H has a 28 W TDP, while the 9750HF has a 45 W TDP, indicating the latter draws more power to feed its additional cores.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows clear divergence across every major category. Core count differs: 4 cores for the 11390H versus 6 cores for the 9750HF. Thread count doubles accordingly: 8 threads versus 12 threads. Base clock favors the 11390H at 2.90 GHz versus 2.60 GHz, and boost clock also favors it at 5.00 GHz versus 4.50 GHz.

Process node differs: 10 nm for the 11390H versus 14 nm for the 9750HF. Die size is nearly identical at 146.1 mm² versus 149 mm². The 11390H has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, while the 9750HF has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core. L3 is shared at 12 MB on both. Memory bandwidth is 51.2 GB/s on the 11390H versus 42.7 GB/s on the 9750HF.

PCIe support differs: Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the 11390H versus Gen 3 on the 9750HF. Integrated graphics are present on the 11390H as Iris XE 96EU, absent on the 9750HF. The TDP is 28 W versus 45 W. Sockets differ: BGA 1449 versus BGA 1440. Production status differs: Active versus End-of-life. The 11390H has a launch MSRP of $426; the 9750HF has no launch MSRP recorded. Release dates differ: 2021-06-20 for the 11390H versus 2019-04-22 for the 9750HF. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results form a nearly perfect pattern of consistency. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 9750HF scores 876 versus 828 for the 11390H, a 5.5% lead. In R15 single-core, the 9750HF leads 123 to 116, a 5.7% margin. Cinebench R20 multi-core repeats the pattern: 3652 versus 3451, again 5.5%. R20 single-core: 515 versus 487, a 5.4% lead. R23 multi-core: 8696 versus 8218, 5.5%. R23 single-core: 1227 versus 1160, 5.5%. The consistency is striking: the 9750HF leads by 5.4% to 5.7% across every single Cinebench test, regardless of version or thread count.

The Geekbench results invert the picture dramatically. In Geekbench multi-core, the 11390H scores 5478 versus 4844 for the 9750HF, a 13.1% lead. In Geekbench single-core, the 11390H scores 1985 versus 1365, a 45.4% lead. These are not marginal differences. The single-core gap is nearly three times larger than any Cinebench margin in the entire comparison.

The aggregate average benchmark scores tell a hybrid story. The 11390H averages 2715, the 9750HF averages 2662, a 2% overall edge for the newer chip. That aggregate figure pulls from all eight tests, so it balances the 9750HF's Cinebench wins against the 11390H's Geekbench sweeps. The 11390H's nearest rival, the Intel Xeon D-1577, shares the exact same average score of 2715. The 9750HF's nearest rival, the Intel Xeon E5-4650 v3, is 0.1% behind at 2664.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i7-9750HF wins everywhere Cinebench matters. That includes rendering workloads, 3D scene compilation, and any CPU-bound task that scales with pure core count and thread count. Its six cores and twelve threads give it a structural edge that the 11390H cannot overcome in these tests, despite the newer architecture. The 5.5% consistent margin across all Cinebench versions suggests this advantage is stable and predictable. For users running Blender, Cinebench itself, or similar render engines, the 9750HF is the stronger choice based on recorded data.

The Core i7-11390H wins everywhere Geekbench matters. Its 45.4% single-core lead is the single largest margin in the comparison, and it also wins multi-core Geekbench by 13.1% despite having two fewer cores. This indicates that the Tiger Lake architecture's per-core efficiency, higher clocks, and larger L2 cache more than compensate for the core deficit in this particular workload mix. For general productivity, office applications, web browsing, and any software that responds to single-thread performance, the 11390H is the clear winner.

The 11390H also wins on platform features. It includes integrated graphics, which the 9750HF lacks entirely. It supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes versus Gen 3. It offers higher memory bandwidth at 51.2 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s. It runs at a lower 28 W TDP versus 45 W, which matters for mobile battery life and thermal management. It remains in active production, while the 9750HF is end-of-life.

The 9750HF wins on raw multi-core throughput in rendering-style workloads, as evidenced by its Cinebench sweep. It also carries a larger physical core count, which can matter for workloads that the Geekbench suite does not fully represent. Its higher TDP suggests it is designed for thicker, better-cooled laptops that can sustain heavy multi-threaded loads.

For a buyer choosing between these two today, the 11390H is the more future-proof option: active production, newer architecture, integrated graphics, faster memory, and PCIe Gen 4 support. The 9750HF is the stronger renderer but sits at end-of-life status with no integrated graphics and older connectivity standards. The decision hinges on whether the user's primary applications behave more like Cinebench or more like Geekbench. The data says the 9750HF wins the former, and the 11390H wins the latter by a much larger margin.