Intel Core i7-11700F vs Intel Core Ultra 5 236V Comparison

The Intel Core i7-11700F and Intel Core Ultra 5 236V represent two distinct generations of Intel design philosophy, separated by process technology, market segment, and architectural priorities. The data shows a fascinating split: the older i7-11700F wins 11 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, yet the newer Ultra 5 236V counters with decisive victories in single-threaded and specialized workloads. Both CPUs hold a 75th percentile ranking among all processors, and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical—21988 for the i7 versus 21952 for the Ultra 5, a difference of just 0.2%. This near-parity in overall performance masks fundamental differences in how each chip achieves its results.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-11700F is the clear winner in multi-threaded and throughput-oriented tasks. Its 11 benchmark victories include all six Cinebench tests (R15, R20, R23, both multi-core and single-core variants), where it leads by roughly 12.6% to 12.9% across the board. The data also shows dominant wins in integer math (104.1% ahead), data compression (50.7% ahead), random string sorting (41% ahead), and extended instructions (18.5% ahead). This pattern suggests the i7-11700F excels in workloads that scale with thread count and raw compute throughput—think compilation, batch processing, and data-heavy desktop applications.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 236V, despite losing the overall benchmark count, wins in areas that matter for modern, efficiency-sensitive use cases. Its most striking victory is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where it scores 171 versus the i7's 56—a 67.3% advantage. It also wins passmark_physics by 41.1%, floating-point math by 12.3%, and both passmark_single_thread variants by 16.2%. The Ultra 5's single-thread score of 3893 versus 3262 indicates superior per-core performance, which translates to snappier response in lightly-threaded applications, gaming, and daily productivity tasks. Data encryption is another win for the Ultra 5, albeit a narrow one at 3.7%.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two chips is vast. The i7-11700F uses Rocket Lake, built on Intel's 14 nm process with a 276 mm² die size. It features 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The Ultra 5 236V uses Lunar Lake, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node—a process generation gap that explains its dramatically lower 17 W TDP versus the i7's 65 W. The Ultra 5 also has 8 cores but only 8 threads, indicating it lacks Hyper-Threading, which the i7 retains.

Cache hierarchies tell a different story. The i7-11700F has 80 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 236V has 192 KB of L1 per core and a massive 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 8 MB of shared L3. This suggests the Ultra 5 relies more heavily on its private caches to feed its cores quickly, while the i7 leans on a larger shared pool for multi-threaded coherence. Memory support also diverges: the i7 uses DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 5's memory support is listed as "unknown, depends on motherboard" but remains dual-channel. The i7 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Ultra 5 has PCIe Gen 5 but only 4 lanes—a significant reduction in expansion capability.

The i7-11700F is a desktop part for Intel Socket 1200, released in March 2021 and now end-of-life. The Ultra 5 236V is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2833, released in September 2024 and still active. The Ultra 5 also includes integrated Arc 130V graphics, whereas the i7 has no integrated graphics listed. The i7 has a launch MSRP of $298; the Ultra 5 has no listed launch price.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a consistent, almost mechanical pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7-11700F scores 17633 versus the Ultra 5's 15628, a 12.8% advantage. The single-core R23 test shows a similar gap: 2489 versus 2206, also 12.8%. This consistency across all Cinebench versions—R15, R20, R23—suggests the i7's advantage is structural, likely due to its higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz versus 4.70 GHz and its 16 threads versus 8. The data does not show a single Cinebench test where the Ultra 5 narrows the gap below 12.6%.

The PassMark suite tells a more nuanced story. The i7-11700F's 104.1% lead in integer math (79133 versus 38765) is the largest margin in the entire comparison. Data compression also heavily favors the i7 at 266035 versus 176554, a 50.7% gap. Random string sorting follows with a 41% advantage. These results indicate that the i7's dual-thread-per-core design provides substantial throughput benefits for integer-heavy, data-manipulation tasks.

However, the Ultra 5 236V fights back in specific areas. Its 171 score in find_prime_numbers versus the i7's 56 is a 67.3% blowout—a massive reversal of the general trend. Physics simulation also favors the Ultra 5 at 1503 versus 885, a 41.1% margin. Floating-point math goes to the Ultra 5 at 52774 versus 46307, a 12.3% win. Single-thread performance is clearly the Ultra 5's territory: 3893 versus 3262, a 16.2% advantage in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread. The data encryption test is the closest contest, with the Ultra 5 winning narrowly at 13049 versus 12563, a 3.7% edge.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. The i7-11700F has 16 threads versus the Ultra 5's 8. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz, and boost clocks are 4.90 GHz versus 4.70 GHz. TDP is a major differentiator: 65 W for the i7, 17 W for the Ultra 5. Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1200 versus Intel BGA 2833. Process nodes are 14 nm versus 3 nm, with the i7's die size at 276 mm² and the Ultra 5's unspecified. L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core; L2 is 512 KB per core versus 2.5 MB per core; L3 is 16 MB shared versus 8 MB shared.

Memory support shows DDR4 for the i7 versus "unknown, depends on motherboard" for the Ultra 5. Memory bandwidth is 51.2 GB/s for the i7, with no figure listed for the Ultra 5. PCIe lanes differ substantially: Gen 4 with 20 lanes versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Integrated graphics are absent on the i7 but present as Arc 130V on the Ultra 5. Market segments are Desktop versus Mobile. Production status is End-of-life versus Active. Release dates are March 2021 versus September 2024. The i7 has a launch MSRP of $298; the Ultra 5 has none.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has better multi-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-11700F wins every multi-threaded benchmark in the comparison, including Cinebench R23 multi-core (17633 versus 15628, a 12.8% lead) and PassMark multithread (20728 versus 18375, also 12.8%). Its 16 threads versus 8 provide a clear advantage in threaded workloads.

Q: Why does the Ultra 5 236V win in single-thread tests despite lower clock speeds?

A: The Ultra 5 236V has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz versus the i7's 4.90 GHz, yet it wins passmark_single_thread by 16.2% (3893 versus 3262). The data suggests its newer 3 nm architecture and larger per-core L2 cache (2.5 MB versus 512 KB) enable more efficient instruction execution per clock.

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

A: The largest margin is in passmark_integer_math, where the i7-11700F leads by 104.1% (79133 versus 38765). The second-largest is in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the Ultra 5 leads by 67.3% (171 versus 56).

Q: Are these CPUs comparable in overall performance?

A: Yes, their average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 21988 for the i7-11700F and 21952 for the Ultra 5 236V, a difference of 0.2%. Both are in the 75th percentile of all CPUs. However, they achieve parity through very different strengths.

Q: Which CPU is more power-efficient?

A: The Ultra 5 236V has a TDP of 17 W versus the i7-11700F's 65 W, indicating the mobile chip consumes significantly less power. This is consistent with its 3 nm process node versus the i7's 14 nm node.

Q: Can the i7-11700F be upgraded to match the Ultra 5's features?

A: No. The i7-11700F lacks integrated graphics, uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, and supports DDR4 memory. The Ultra 5 has Arc 130V integrated graphics, PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes, and different memory requirements. They also use incompatible sockets.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two CPUs optimized for different worlds. The Intel Core i7-11700F is the choice for users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput in a desktop environment. Its 12.8% lead across all Cinebench tests, 104.1% lead in integer math, and 50.7% lead in data compression make it the superior processor for content creation, software compilation, and any workload that can utilize its 16 threads. The 65 W TDP and 276 mm² die on 14 nm are acceptable trade-offs for sustained performance on a desktop platform with PCIe Gen 4 and 20 lanes.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 236V is built for a different reality—one where power draw and portability matter more than raw thread count. Its 17 W TDP and 3 nm process make it ideal for laptops and thin-and-light devices. The data shows it wins in single-thread performance (16.2% ahead), physics simulation (41.1% ahead), and floating-point math (12.3% ahead), which are critical for responsive daily use, gaming, and scientific calculations. The integrated Arc 130V graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in many scenarios. Its 8 MB of L3 and 2.5 MB per-core L2 indicate a design philosophy that prioritizes low-latency access over large shared pools.

The benchmark split—11 wins for the i7, 6 for the Ultra 5—reflects the fundamental trade-off between thread count and per-core efficiency. For desktop users with access to power and cooling, the i7-11700F delivers more raw compute. For mobile users who need capable performance in a power envelope one-quarter the size, the Ultra 5 236V is the logical choice. The 0.2% overall score difference is a statistical tie, but the architectural gulf means these CPUs are not interchangeable. The i7 is a workhorse for threaded production; the Ultra 5 is a precision tool for efficient, responsive computing in constrained environments.