![]() Letting our Asus test board take care of the power limits, however, means a constant 4.2GHz under full load. If you stick to the Intel recommended limits that will only last a few seconds, but most motherboards give you the option to let the silicon run at its limits. It's cheaper still, has the same six-core, 12-thread design-thanks to Intel finally lifting the artificial Hyper-Threading embargo-and can still hit a healthy 4.2GHz all-core Turbo clock speed. ![]() The Core i5 11400F just takes it that little bit further. Take the power shackles off in your BIOS, forgetting the dire situation we've put the planet in, and you can squeeze even more performance out of the chip.Įven if it was the same price as the six-core Ryzen the Core i5 11600K would still look good. The Core i5 11600K is a great little chip, far cheaper and at least as effective a gaming chip as the popular Ryzen 5 5600X. Lower down the stack, however, it's a different matter. Though up top, considering what you're missing out on compared with either the Core i9 10900K or Ryzen 9 5900X, the boon of higher gaming performance doesn't make up for genuine lack in multithreaded grunt. This backport resulted in a bigger slice of silicon and meant it couldn't fit the previous generation's ten-core maximum into the top Rocket Lake chip, and if nothing else that made it feel like tangibly worse value.īut what Cypress Cove does deliver is higher IPC, and that has led to higher gaming performance across the board compared with previous Intel desktop chips. It offers fewer cores than its erstwhile Core i9 compatriot and features the bastardised Cypress Cove core architecture that pulled the 10nm Sunny Cove core back into the arms of 14nm manufacturing. The top-end Core i9 11900K is a chip that only its parents could love. The Core i5-11600KF still manages to take a sizable lead over the 11400F, showing that these benchmarks are more affected by the single-core performance rather than multi-threaded grunt.As a CPU generation itself, however, Rocket Lake has felt kind of lacklustre. The single-threaded test sees the Core i5-11600KF claim its maiden victory.įinally, we have the 3DMark scores which are more indicative of the graphics card performance than the CPU. The Core i5-11400F which has the same TDP as the 5600X scores just 10,132 and 1,401 points in the multi and single-threaded benchmarks, respectively.ĬPU-Z sees the Ryzen 5 5600X take a rather substantial lead over both the Core i5-11400F and the Core i5-11600KF in the multi-threaded bench, being more than a thousand points faster than the former and nearly 800 points faster than the latter. In Cinebench R23, the Ryzen 5 5600X is a hundred points ahead of the stock 11600KF in the multi-threaded test and 74 points faster in the single-core benchmark. The Core i5-11400F, although offers similar performance in the single-threaded test, it falls behind by a notable margin in multi-threaded workloads. ![]() The deltas shrink to just 5% in Cinebench R20 for the multi-core benchmark and just a couple of percent for the single-core test. In Cinebench R15, the Ryzen 5 5600X is a significant 15% faster than the 11600K in the multi-core benchmark and a modest 6-7% faster in the single-threaded test.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |