Intel Core i5-11400F

[Deleted member 205776]

Two main reasons:

- not everybody plays games, or at least not demanding games.
- getting a picture on the monitor. When building a new rig, or troubleshooting a blank picture problem on an existing rig, this guarantees a picture on the monitor if there's an issue with the graphics card. It can be a life saver in some circumstances, in fact. Well worth paying a little extra for.

The second point 100%. My only caveat with Ryzen CPUs is no iGPU. I could really use an iGPU if my GPU ends up dying.

 

[W1zzard]

How was all core frequency with max powerlimits?

Added: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-11400f/22.html

Looks like useful data, I'll make this a permanent addition to all future Intel reviews

 

[Dirtdog]

View attachment 195771

That shows the importance of minimum framerates and not just averages. From the averages above, the 11400 looks good compared to the 10600K. From the minimums though, the 10th gen would provide a much better experience. Then again, it could be due to GN's obsession with using power limits which is known to impact 11th gen a lot worse.

 

[B-Real]

Meanwhile ...

https://www.newegg.com/intel-core-i5-11400f-core-i5-11th-gen/p/N82E16819118264?Item=N82E16819118264
Intel Core i5-11400F $159.99

https://www.newegg.com/amd-ryzen-5-3600/p/N82E16819113569
AMD RYZEN 5 3600 $224.99

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core 3.7 GHz AM4 CPU Processor - Newegg.com

Buy AMD Ryzen 5 5600X - Ryzen 5 5000 Series Vermeer (Zen 3) 6-Core 3.7 GHz Socket AM4 65W None Integrated Graphics Desktop Processor - 100-100000065BOX with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!

www.newegg.com

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X $299.99

Interestingly, the price difference wasn't a problem for you when Intel was better in gaming, right? LOL, pathetic.

 

[Dirtdog]

I wonder how many uninformed consumers will buy the 5600X because it is '3.7GHz' and the 11400F is only '2.6GHz' without understanding how Intel's turbo system works.

 

[TristanX]

In many tests 10400 is much faster than 11400, and results are different than in 10400 review.
Also other CPU's are exposed in unfair way. 11600K should be posted with max power limit / OC, as it increase perf by significant margin. Also does not make sense to include CPU's very old and/or 4C like Ryzen 3100 / 3300, i3-9100F, i5-9400F as well as 8C+ like i9-9900K, i9-10900K and others. Please keep rational comparison with similar 6C CPU's

 

[8BitZ80]

I'm struggling to find any meaningful differences between 10th gen and 11th gen.

The 11400F might be good in a budget office system with 6 cores 12 threads, but....the 10400 also has 6C/12T AND an iGPU AND it's cheaper!

 

[Taraquin]

Added: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/intel-core-i5-11400f/22.html

Looks like useful data, I'll make this a permanent addition to all future Intel reviews

Awesome Consumption MC without PL is terrible vs 10400F.

 

[blu3dragon]

That's a good question indeed, will do a test run for you and update the review

This would be very helpful to include in reviews going forward

 

[Raendor]

In many tests 10400 is much faster than 11400, and results are different than in 10400 review.
Also other CPU's are exposed in unfair way. 11600K should be posted with max power limit / OC, as it increase perf by significant margin. Also does not make sense to include CPU's very old and/or 4C like Ryzen 3100 / 3300, i3-9100F, i5-9400F as well as 8C+ like i9-9900K, i9-10900K and others. Please keep rational comparison with similar 6C CPU's

First sentence is a nonsense. Neither Gamersnexus nor Optimum Tech nor any either respectable youtuber had a benchmark where 10400 is faster than 11400. Plus I expect there will be a microcode update that will improve it even further.

 

[80-watt Hamster]

First time overclockers are the #1 threat to society from what I've come across on the help forums. They get advice from friends, a youtube vid, etc .. and they start screwing with their bios starting with voltage. It's like they see the light socket and can't keep themselves from sticking their tongue in it.

Everybody's gotta start somewhere. Screwing up is an important part of the learning process.

I don't think that is what they said, but if they did then they are point blank incompetent noobs. And so are you if you just bit into that without thinking about it.

It is that kind of mindless repeating of outdated information that keeps people out there paying $200-$230 for 3600/3600X when it is just a plain stupid choice.

Just because you're right doesn't mean you have to be a dick about it.

 

[Deleted member 205776]

the 10400 also has 6C/12T AND an iGPU AND it's cheaper!

Exactly. This gen is making Comet Lake look better and better with each new review lol

 

[blu3dragon]

Looking at total system cost between intel 11th gen and Zen3, motherboard availability and cost is in favor of zen3 right now.
I'm sure someone can come up with some better options, but a quick search, and assuming wifi is a requirement led me to the following:
Intel z590 (nothing available in the more budget chipsets right now) - $210 (or $220 without the rebate):

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/V7PQzy/msi-z590-pro-wifi-atx-lga1200-motherboard-z590-pro-wifi

AMD B550 - $169:

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/RhrYcf/msi-mag-b550m-mortar-wifi-micro-atx-am4-motherboard-mag-b550m-mortar-wifi

There are some VRM temps of the B550M-mortar here: https://www.techspot.com/review/2044-amd-b550-motherboard-vrm/ and while not the best, they are plenty good enough for a budget build.
No data on the Z590-pro yet. I just have to trust MSI put enough VRMs for at least 200W into a ~$200 z590 motherboard.

If you are patient enough to find a 5600x at MSRP (which I think is possible now), that means the total system price is $100 more for the 5600x (or $90 more without the rebate) compared with an 11400F

Total system cost of the 11400F is likely to come down in the next few months as more lower end motherboards become available. One thing to note though is that you will likely need to limit power consumption on a lower cost board. 95W might be a safe limit, and that should still give a reasonable benefit over 65W for gaming.
The other hidden cost with Rocket lake will the on the PSU side. 500W might be good enough for a budget AMD build, but probably on the limit for rocket lake once you add a gpu.

Overall it just seems like it is not a good time to be building a budget gaming PC, particularly given the GPU situation. Hopefully in a few months GPU stock will improve, rocket lake motherboard availability improves, and the competition drives AMD to release some lower cost Zen3 parts.

 

[ftgf]

Looking at total system cost between intel 11th gen and Zen3, motherboard availability and cost is in favor of zen3 right now.
I'm sure someone can come up with some better options, but a quick search, and assuming wifi is a requirement led me to the following:
Intel z590 (nothing available in the more budget chipsets right now) - $210 (or $220 without the rebate):

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/V7PQzy/msi-z590-pro-wifi-atx-lga1200-motherboard-z590-pro-wifi

AMD B550 - $169:

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/RhrYcf/msi-mag-b550m-mortar-wifi-micro-atx-am4-motherboard-mag-b550m-mortar-wifi

There are some VRM temps of the B550M-mortar here: https://www.techspot.com/review/2044-amd-b550-motherboard-vrm/ and while not the best, they are plenty good enough for a budget build.
No data on the Z590-pro yet. I just have to trust MSI put enough VRMs for at least 200W into a ~$200 z590 motherboard.

If you are patient enough to find a 5600x at MSRP (which I think is possible now), that means the total system price is $100 more for the 5600x (or $90 more without the rebate) compared with an 11400F

Total system cost of the 11400F is likely to come down in the next few months as more lower end motherboards become available. One thing to note though is that you will likely need to limit power consumption on a lower cost board. 95W might be a safe limit, and that should still give a reasonable benefit over 65W for gaming.
The other hidden cost with Rocket lake will the on the PSU side. 500W might be good enough for a budget AMD build, but probably on the limit for rocket lake once you add a gpu.

Overall it just seems like it is not a good time to be building a budget gaming PC, particularly given the GPU situation. Hopefully in a few months GPU stock will improve, rocket lake motherboard availability improves, and the competition drives AMD to release some lower cost Zen3 parts.

Why would anyone pair a z590 chipset mobo with the lowest 11th gen sku? Asrock has perfect boards for the 11400f at around $105 with wifi and vrm heatsinks. They were in stock prior to launch but they got bought up. I'm sure more are coming soon. If you need to build something now it's not a bad choice. You can buy a 11400f and a b560 board cheaper than just the 5600x by itself. It makes sense in many scenarios and if you're stuck without a gpu just bump up to the 11400.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Looking at total system cost between intel 11th gen and Zen3, motherboard availability and cost is in favor of zen3 right now.
I'm sure someone can come up with some better options, but a quick search, and assuming wifi is a requirement led me to the following:
Intel z590 (nothing available in the more budget chipsets right now) - $210 (or $220 without the rebate):

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/V7PQzy/msi-z590-pro-wifi-atx-lga1200-motherboard-z590-pro-wifi

AMD B550 - $169:

https://pcpartpicker.com/product/RhrYcf/msi-mag-b550m-mortar-wifi-micro-atx-am4-motherboard-mag-b550m-mortar-wifi

There are some VRM temps of the B550M-mortar here: https://www.techspot.com/review/2044-amd-b550-motherboard-vrm/ and while not the best, they are plenty good enough for a budget build.
No data on the Z590-pro yet. I just have to trust MSI put enough VRMs for at least 200W into a ~$200 z590 motherboard.

If you are patient enough to find a 5600x at MSRP (which I think is possible now), that means the total system price is $100 more for the 5600x (or $90 more without the rebate) compared with an 11400F

Total system cost of the 11400F is likely to come down in the next few months as more lower end motherboards become available. One thing to note though is that you will likely need to limit power consumption on a lower cost board. 95W might be a safe limit, and that should still give a reasonable benefit over 65W for gaming.
The other hidden cost with Rocket lake will the on the PSU side. 500W might be good enough for a budget AMD build, but probably on the limit for rocket lake once you add a gpu.

Overall it just seems like it is not a good time to be building a budget gaming PC, particularly given the GPU situation. Hopefully in a few months GPU stock will improve, rocket lake motherboard availability improves, and the competition drives AMD to release some lower cost Zen3 parts.

11400F + 10 phase VRM B560 motherboard that can run 10900K stable @ 4.9Ghz all core for the MSRP of a 5600X. This is not the really crappy Pro4 motherboard that gave Z490 a bad name. This board also has a USB 3.2 2x2 (20 Gbit) port.

 

[altermere]

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157916
ASRock Z490 Extreme4

Supports DDR4 4266+(OC)*/ 4133(OC)/ 4000(OC)/ 3866(OC)/ 3800(OC)/ 3733(OC)/ 3600(OC)/ 3200(OC)/ 2933/ 2800/ 2666/ 2400/ 2133 non-ECC, un-buffered memory

* Core (i9/i7) support DDR4 up to 2933; Core (i5/i3), Pentium and Celeron support DDR4 up to 2666.

those are max non-XMP speeds

Why would anyone pair a z590 chipset mobo with the lowest 11th gen sku? Asrock has perfect boards for the 11400f at around $105 with wifi and vrm heatsinks. They were in stock prior to launch but they got bought up. I'm sure more are coming soon. If you need to build something now it's not a bad choice. You can buy a 11400f and a b560 board cheaper than just the 5600x by itself. It makes sense in many scenarios and if you're stuck without a gpu just bump up to the 11400.

yeah, b560 is $130 and it's the same as AMD's b550 feature-wise: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/KH...end-atx-lga1200-motherboard-b560-steel-legend
use a Vetroo V5 for $30 as cooler: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08F21X2VP

 

[blu3dragon]

I should have asked you guys what motherboard would be good
Knowing that asrock can be variable I just did a quick search for MSI, Asus and Gigabyte with WiFi. No B560 available on pcpartpicker for those, but I expect they should be soon.
No wifi on that $130 asrock either, but it might not be needed or could be added with a separate card.

On the AMD side you can go lower as well, e.g. $125 with wifi: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Yt...c-atx-am4-motherboard-b550-phantom-gaming-4ac
So there is still a gap, but B560 does and should narrow it.

 

[Why_Me]

I should have asked you guys what motherboard would be good
Knowing that asrock can be variable I just did a quick search for MSI, Asus and Gigabyte with WiFi. No B560 available on pcpartpicker for those, but I expect they should be soon.
No wifi on that $130 asrock either, but it might not be needed or could be added with a separate card.

On the AMD side you can go lower as well, e.g. $125 with wifi: https://pcpartpicker.com/product/Yt...c-atx-am4-motherboard-b550-phantom-gaming-4ac
So there is still a gap, but B560 does and should narrow it.

Multiple B560/H570 and H510 boards offer built in wi fi 6. If you want wi fi then do it right and at least get wi fi 6.

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144397 <--- example A (wi fi 6 ftw).

All Asrock B560 boards tmk have what's called a 'M.2 KEY E' slot.

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813157977 <--- you can see it there.

https://www.asrock.com/MB/Intel/B560 Pro4/index.asp <--- a better look here.

https://www.amazon.com/Intel-Wi-Fi-Gig-Desktop-AX200-NGWG-NV/dp/B085M7VPDP <--- Intel Wi Fi 6 + Bluetooth desktop kit complete w/antenaes.

First sentence is a nonsense. Neither Gamersnexus nor Optimum Tech nor any either respectable youtuber had a benchmark where 10400 is faster than 11400. Plus I expect there will be a microcode update that will improve it even further.

The microcode update for B560 boards showed up on Asus website last night.

 

[defaultluser]

I'm still planning to wait for 5600G to update my HTPC later this year - BUT, if my system suddenly dies before that day, I can replace it with this incredible-value processor (with igpu added).

They have B560 motherboards with HDMI 2 and DP 1.4 outputs (Not priced into the stratosphere either!)

ASRock B560M-ITX/AC LGA 1200 Mini ITX Intel Motherboard - Newegg.com

Buy ASRock B560M-ITX/AC LGA 1200 Intel B560 SATA 6Gb/s Mini ITX Intel Motherboard with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!

www.newegg.com

 

[Why_Me]

I'm still planning to wait for 5600G to update my HTPC later this year - BUT, if my system suddenly dies before that day, I can replace it with this incredible-value processor (with igpu added).

They have B560 motherboards with HDMI 2 and DP 1.4 outputs (Not priced into the stratosphere either!)

ASRock B560M-ITX/AC LGA 1200 Mini ITX Intel Motherboard - Newegg.com

Buy ASRock B560M-ITX/AC LGA 1200 Intel B560 SATA 6Gb/s Mini ITX Intel Motherboard with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!

www.newegg.com

Here's another ITX board worth having a look at.

https://www.newegg.com/p/N82E16813144400
MSI H510I PRO WIFI $129.99

https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/H510I-PRO-WIFI
Intel Wi-Fi 6 AX201, Bluetooth 5.1

 

[ftgf]

Here comes the cherry picker. I quoted Techspot's conclusion from their massive game suite. But you went and found the worst case example and think that you have added anything useful to this conversation? Nope. Go buy a Ryzen 3600 and OC it, and compare it to the 11400. Keep on fooling yourself, but don't fool others. This is a thread in response to Techpowerup's own reviews which showed the 10700k faster than the 11900k for gaming, and the 10400 faster than the 11400 for gaming. The fact that we are even arguing after these "worst results for a Intel CPU release in a decade" shows people will argue anything.


Watch what the stock cooler does to this CPU's performance, you lose 600 mhz for example. This is one reason I'm selling my 11500 system, because I didn't save as much money after buying a tower cooler for it: View attachment 195859

Yes because most users are running blender renders... Come on man. You accuse others of cherry picking yet you are reaching for useless examples to bash the stock cooler? Seriously?

 

[RandallFlagg]

Are you an idiot? I was talking about him cherry picking Red Dead 2 in response to me quoting TechpowerUP's summary of all games, and Techspot's summary of all games. Blender render isn't cherry picking, it is just an example of any 100 percent usage, looking at the cooler's performance. SMH. Wow man. Get a tool and apply a fixed wattage for all I care lol.... lol... From my experience I hit 100 degrees with the stock cooler just loading textures, but average around 85-90 degrees while gaming. Depends on your case setup.

You obviously didn't look closely at my post. I didn't cherry pick anything, RDR2, Hitman 3, CyberPunk2077, and Adobe Photoshop are all there. Also attached was blender render power consumption where the same chip took less power than the 3600.

But if you really keep asking for it, there's plenty of ammo, because you're very very wrong about the 3600 being any kind of value vs the 11400.

You might want to go look up the terms cognitive dissonance, including anchoring bias and confirmation bias. You seem to suffer from many forms of this.

More stuff on 11400 vs 3600 :

Source -

 

[80-watt Hamster]

Do you know what is sad? To post nonsense, and then misdirect and not respond coherently. To fulfill your request, I promise to randomly test the cooler with 10 different applications at 100 load and use an average of the max power consumption of the CPU... what a joke. The ENTIRE POINT is the CPU loses frequency at max usage due to heat, something you haven't denied so why are we even talking. Bye.


As for you, your comeback to me accusing you of cherry picking, is to cherry pick some more. I quoted the summary results of all tests. You are welcome to do that also. Like this (from the very article this thread is supposedly based on:

View attachment 195890

As for gaming, we know why the 11400f IS a better gaming option than the Ryzen 3600, and that is because Intel brought back high speed memory support to the 11400f with a B560 board. But don't be fooled if you build a budget system with slow memory.

I called you a cherry picker, because you cherry picked results. You REPLIED to my post which was quoting the summary from Techspot's article. Go read Techspot's article, see that I quoted it correctly, and come back here, and stop cherry picking, stop changing the subject. Done with you also. You literally didn't reply with a summary, but more cherry picking. Can't make this up.

Intel Core i5-10400 vs. AMD Ryzen 5 3600 | TechSpot

Chill out. Jeebus.

What is your thesis? If it's that the 3600 was a better buy than the 10400 in May 2020 (when that Techspot article you linked was published), then sure. I can get behind that. But vs. the 11400 in April 2021, when the 3600 now sells for north of 200USD... that's a tougher case to make. If that's even what you're saying. You mostly seem mad that people are arguing with you.

 

[Raendor]

To fulfill your request, I promise to randomly test the cooler with 10 different applications at 100 load and use an average of the max power consumption of the CPU... /s except that would be a bad joke. The ENTIRE POINT is the CPU loses frequency at max usage due to heat, something you haven't denied so why are we even talking. Use tower cooler or get bad results with the 11400f.


As for you, your comeback to me accusing you of cherry picking, is to cherry pick some more. I quoted the summary results of all tests. You are welcome to do that also. Like this (from the very article this thread is supposedly based on:

View attachment 195890

As for gaming, we know why the 11400f would be a better gaming option than the Ryzen 3600, and that is because Intel brought back high speed memory support to the 11400f with a B560 board. But don't be fooled if you build a budget system with slow memory. Still doesn't change the fact that people who buy the Ryzen 3600 apply LARGE OCs because it is easy to hit 4.4ghz, while people who buy the 10400f and 11400f are stuck with low clocks and MUCH WORSE relative performance than reviews suggest, especially in productivity, where the 3600 is already ahead without an OC.

Go read Techspot's article, see that I quoted it correctly, and come back here. I am NOT advocating the 3600 over the 11400f for gaming, I think it doesn't matter, but I also don't think the 3600 is somehow bad now. The 11400f isn't a solid improvement over the 10400f. The 5600x is way out ahead.

Intel Core i5-10400 vs. AMD Ryzen 5 3600 | TechSpot

I also honestly don't like Optimum Tech's reviews anymore. He did a summary page of the 11400f vs the 11600k. That's it. No summary vs. the 10400f (rather obvious choice) and not vs the Ryzen 3600. Not very useful. At least Hardware Unboxed will publish a summary page with all results. Expect that video tonight? Tomorrow? We'll see. So I quoted their result from the 10400f vs 3600 round up BECAUSE Techpowerup showed no improvements to gaming with the 11400f vs the 10400f.

Why do you need a summary page when at each individual benchmark your beloved 3600 gets oblitirated and sits in the bottom? There’s simply no need for summary with irrelevant cpu.

 

[HenrySomeone]

Why do you need a summary page when at each individual benchmark your beloved 3600 gets oblitirated and sits in the bottom? There’s simply no need for summary with irrelevant cpu.

Bingo! 3600 was somewhat relevant before 10th gen was out (and immediately after when it was still cheaper), although for primarily gaming, 9600kf was still superior at a comparable price, but right now, even if it was the same price as 11400(f), it's just way too slow in too many instances. Until team red can get out a 5600 non-x at no more than $220 (and that's already a stretch) and with decent enough stock (probably unlikely for the foreseeable future), Intel is the undisputed master of the house below $250 (=i.e. where the most cpus are sold, which is nicely reflected in the last quarter market share).
Oh, by the way - currently even the now obsolete Ryzen 2600 is more expensive than 11400f and if you want something at the same price, you have to back another gen to 1600, which is just laughable at this point...
AMD RYZEN 5 2600 6-Core 3.4 GHz Desktop CPU Processor - Newegg.com
AMD Desktop Ryzen 5 1600 65W AM4 Processor with Wraith Stealth Cooler - Newegg.com
Intel Core i5-11400F 2.6 GHz LGA 1200 BX8070811400F Desktop Processor - Newegg.com

And that's just my biggest gripe with AMD - as soon as they have a competitive product (or at least think they have like with the FX 9590 which started at almost $1000, lmao ), they price it higher than Intel's alternatives and than harkens back to at least the time of early Athlons X2 which while being undoubtedly better than Pentium Ds, were also much more expensive than the entry models of the latter (the 805 in particular was the only really budget option dual core at the time). And then the second thing is, even when they get ousted by competition, their prices remain high for months, like when Core 2 duo line absolutely obliterated them in mid 2006 (the very cheapest E6300 could beat the most expensive X2 when OCed), they remained expensive until 2007. I actually expect something very similar this year when Alder Lake lands (and likely ousts everything but 5950x in multi thread).