The new (11400F) vs. older (10400F) Intel Core i5 processor

Conclusion

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

The class of base Core i5 processors (the cheapest with the lowest base clock) is extremely popular among users. Not just Intel processors, but overall. This is for its unique price-performance ratio.

From a retrospective point of view, it’s a bit of a paradox, because AMD had been leading the lower class segment with affordable prices. However, the situation has changed and if Intel is interesting anywhere, it is this class of cheaper processors under 200 euros. AMD has nothing in this price range yet, at least now.

The cheapest Ryzen 5 (5600X) sells for 280 euros, which is more than you pay for the fastest Core i5 (11600K) Rocket Lake with iGPU. We put two processors from the same camp but from different generations against each other. Many of you certainly own the older Core i5-10400F (Comet Lake) for its cost-effectiveness, and you may have been wondering what you would get by upgrading to Rocket Lake (11400F). The socket (LGA 1200) is the same and the new Core i5-11400F works fully in older motherboards with Intel Z490 chipsets, but especially with the more appropriate (cheaper) B46x or H410.

However, this comparison is also interesting for those who do not yet own a processor, but are considering building a new computer that should be relatively performant, but at the lowest possible price.

Although the Core i5-11400F is a direct successor to the Core i5-10400F, it also has 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel also states the same recommended price, although Rocket Lake is usually about 20 euros more expensive on verified stores. And with a little luck, you can find the Ci5-10400F with twice the price difference (some retailers have the processor in stock from 136 euros).

Intergenerational confrontation is therefore extremely attractive here. It is clear that Rocket Lake will have the highest performance, the manufacturing process (14 nm) did not change, but this processor is already built on the new Cypress Cove architecture with higher IPC and higher clock is also achieved. Compared to the 10400F, the 11400F has almost twice the core size and overall higher power consumption. The question is what the price will be for the higher performance and also whether the performance increase will be worth the higher power draw and price. And, of course, in what application situations, we can’t generalize it.

While the Ci5-10400F supports “only” the PCIe 3.0 bus, with the Ci5-11400F you can use the full potential of a PCIe 4.0 SSD. In this class of processors, however, it is currently more of a theoretical than a practical benefit. Although the ethical lifespan of a processor with PCI Express 4.0 support may still be longer with future generations of graphics cards.

In addition to the tested processors, it should be added that in both cases we have variants with the “F” suffix. This means that they do not have an active graphics core and the multiplier is locked, so only cosmetic overclocking is possible by changing the BCLK.

  

As for the Core i5-10400F, it is important to note that the test piece has SRH3D Q0 stepping, so the thermally conductive material under the IHS is paste. There are also soldered variants (with codes SRH79/SRH78), but there are a minimum of them in stock and most of you will get the paste version. Its analysis makes more sense. Read more about the differences of the TIM variant in Ci5-10400F in this article.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Gaming tests

We test performance in games in four resolutions with different graphics settings. To warm up, there is more or less a theoretical resolution of 1280 × 720 px. We had been tweaking graphics settings for this resolution for a long time. We finally decided to go for the lowest possible (Low, Lowest, Ultra Low, …) settings that a game allows.

One could argue that a processor does not calculate how many objects are drawn in such settings (so-called draw calls). However, with high detail at this very low resolution, there was not much difference in performance compared to FHD (which we also test). On the contrary, the GPU load was clearly higher, and this impractical setting should demonstrate the performance of a processor with the lowest possible participation of a graphics card.

At higher resolutions, high settings (for FHD and QHD) and highest (for UHD) are used. In Full HD it’s usually with Anti-Aliasing turned off, but overall, these are relatively practical settings that are commonly used.

The selection of games was made considering the diversity of genres, player popularity and processor performance requirements. For a complete list, see Chapters 7–16. A built-in benchmark is used when a game has one, otherwise we have created our own scenes, which we always repeat with each processor in the same way. We use OCAT to record fps, or the times of individual frames, from which fps are then calculated, and FLAT to analyze CSV. Both were developed by the author of articles (and videos) from GPUreport.cz. For the highest possible accuracy, all runs are repeated three times and the average values of average and minimum fps are drawn in the graphs. These multiple repetitions also apply to non-gaming tests.

Computing tests

Let’s start lightly with PCMark 10, which tests more than sixty sub-tasks in various applications as part of a complete set of “benchmarks for a modern office”. It then sorts them into fewer thematic categories and for the best possible overview we include the gained points from them in the graphs. We then have the total score for single and multithreaded performance from Geekbench 5. Lighter test tasks are also represented by tests in a web browser – Speedometer and Octane. Other tests usually represent higher load or are aimed at advanced users.

We test the 3D rendering performance in Cinebench. In R20, where the results are more widespread, but mainly in R23. Rendering in this version takes longer with each processor, cycles of at least ten minutes. We also test 3D rendering in Blender, with the Cycles render in the BMW and Classroom projects. You can also compare the latter with the test results of graphics cards (contains the same number of tiles).

We test how processors perform in video editing in Adobe Premiere Pro and DaVinci Resolve Studio 17. We use a PugetBench plugin, which deals with all the tasks you may encounter when editing videos. We also use PugetBench services in Adobe After Effects, where the performance of creating graphic effects is tested. Some subtasks use GPU acceleration, but we never turn it off, as no one will do it in practice. Some things don’t even work without GPU acceleration, but on the contrary, it’s interesting to see that the performance in the tasks accelerated by the graphics card also varies as some operations are still serviced by the CPU.

We test video encoding in HandBrake and benchmarks (x264 HD and HWBot x265). x264 HD benchmark works in 32-bit mode (we did not manage to run 64-bit consistently on W10 and in general on newer OS’s it may be unstable and show errors in video). In HandBrake we use the x264 processor encoder for AVC and x265 for HEVC. Detailed settings of individual profiles can be found in the corresponding chapter 25. In addition to video, we also encode audio, where all the details are also stated in the chapter of these tests. Gamers who record their gameplay on video can also have to do with the performance of processor encoders. Therefore, we also test the performance of “processor broadcasting” in two popular applications OBS Studio and Xsplit.

We also have two chapters dedicated to photo editing performance. Adobe has a separate one, where we test Photoshop via PugetBench. However, we do not use PugetBench in Lightroom, because it requires various OS modifications for stable operation, and overall we rather avoided it (due to the higher risk of complications) and create our own test scenes. Both are CPU intensive, whether it’s exporting RAW files to 16-bit TIFF with ProPhotoRGB color space or generating 1:1 thumbnails of 42 lossless CR2 photos.

However, we also have several alternative photo editing applications in which we test CPU performance. These include Affinity Photo, in which we use a built-in benchmark, or XnViewMP for batch photo editing or ZPS X. Of the truly modern ones, there are three Topaz Labz applications that use AI algorithms. DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. Topaz Labs often and happily compares its results with Adobe applications (Photoshop and Lightroom) and boasts of better results. So we’ll see, maybe we’ll get into it from the image point of view sometime. In processor tests, however, we are primarily focused on performance.

We test compression and decompression performance in WinRAR, 7-Zip and Aida64 (Zlib) benchmarks, decryption in TrueCrypt and Aida64, where in addition to AES there are also SHA3 tests. In Aida64, we also test FPU in the chapter of mathematical calculations. From this category you may also be interested in the results of Stockfish 13 and the number of chess combinations achieved per unit time. We perform many tests that can be included in the category of mathematics in SPECworkstation 3.1. It is a set of professional applications extending to various simulations, such as LAMMPS or NAMD, which are molecular simulators. A detailed description of the tests from SPECworkstation 3.1 can be found at spec.org. We do not test 7-zip, Blender and HandBrake from the list for redundancy, because we test performance in them separately in applications. A detailed listing of SPECWS results usually represents times or fps, but we graph “SPEC ratio”, which represents gained points—higher means better.

Processor settings…

We test processors in the default settings, without active PBO2 (AMD) or ABT (Intel) technologies, but naturally with active XMP 2.0.

… and app updates<

The tests should also take into account that, over time, individual updates may affect performance comparisons. Some applications are used in portable versions, which are not updated or can be kept on a stable version, but this is not the case for some others. Typically, games update over time. On the other hand, even intentional obsolescence (and testing something out of date that already behaves differently) would not be entirely the way to go.

In short, just take into account that the accuracy of the results you are comparing decreases a bit over time. To make this analysis easier for you, we indicate when each processor was tested. You can find this in the dialog box, where there is information about the test date of each processor. This dialog box appears in interactive graphs, just hover the mouse cursor over any bar.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Methodology: how we measure power draw

Measuring CPU power consumption is relatively simple, much easier than with graphics cards. All power goes through one or two EPS cables. We also use two to increase the cross-section, which is suitable for high performance AMD processors up to sTR(X)4 or for Intel HEDT, and in fact almost for mainstream processors as well. We have Prova 15 current probes to measure current directly on the wires. This is a much more accurate and reliable way of measuring than relying on internal sensors.

The only limitation of our current probes may be when testing the most powerful processors. These already exceed the maximum range of 30 A, at which high accuracy is guaranteed. For most processors, the range is optimal (even for measuring a lower load, when the probes can be switched to a lower and more accurate range of 4 A), but we will test models with power consumption over 360 W on our own device, a prototype of which we have already built. Its measuring range will no longer be limiting, but for the time being we will be using the Prova probes in the near future.

The probes are properly set to zero and connected to a UNI-T UT71E multimeter before each measurement. It records samples of current values during the tests via the IR-USB interface and writes them in a table at one-second intervals. We can then create bar graphs with power consumption patterns. But we always write average values in bar graphs. Measurements take place in various load modes. The lowest represents an idle Windows 10 desktop. This measurement takes place on a system that had been idle for quite some time.

   

Audio encoding (FLAC) represents a higher load, but processors use only one core or one thread for this. Higher loads, where more cores are involved, are games. We test power consumption in F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy in 1920 × 1080 px. In this resolution, the power consumption is usually the highest or at least similar to that in lower or higher resolutions, where in most cases the CPU power draw rather decreases due to its lower utilization.

Power draw limits are disabled for both Intel and AMD processors, unlocked to the PL2/PPT level. As is the case with most motherboards, this is also set in the default settings. This means that the “Tau” timeout after 56 seconds does not reduce power draw and frequencies even under higher load, and performance is stable. We considered whether or not to accept the more economical settings. In the end, we won’t, on the grounds that the vast majority of users don’t do it either and thus the results and comparisons would be rather uninteresting. The solution would indeed be to test with and without power limit, but this is impossible from a time point of view in the context of processor tests. However, we won’t ignore this issue and it will be getting space in motherboard tests where it makes more sense to us.

We always use motherboards with extremely robust, efficient VRM, so that the losses on MOSFETs distort the measured results as little as possible and the test setups are powered by a high-end 1200 W BeQuiet! Dark Power Pro 12 power supply. It is strong enough to supply every processor, even with a fully loaded GeForce RTX 3080, and at the same time achieves above-standard efficiency even at lower load. For a complete overview of test setup components, see Chapter 5 of this article.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests

When choosing a cooler, we eventually opted for Noctua NH-U14S. It has a high performance and at the same time there is also the TR4-SP3 variant designed for Threadripper processors. It differs only by the base, the radiator is otherwise the same, so it will be possible to test and compare all processors under the same conditions. The fan on the NH-U14S cooler is set to a maximum speed of 1,500 rpm during all tests.

Measurements always take place on a bench-wall in a wind tunnel which simulates a computer case, with the difference that we have more control over it.

System cooling consists of four Noctua NF-S12A PWM fans, which are in an equilibrium ratio of two at the inlet and two at the outlet. Their speed is set at a fixed 550 rpm, which is a relatively practical speed that is not needed to be exceeded. In short, this should be the optimal configuration based on our tests of various system cooling settings.

It is also important to maintain the same air temperature around the processors. Of course, this also changes with regard to how much heat a particular processor produces, but at the inlet of the tunnel it must always be the same for accurate comparisons. In our air-conditioned test lab, it is currently in the range of 21–21.3 °C.

Maintaining a constant inlet temperature is necessary not only for a proper comparison of processor temperatures, but especially for unbiased performance comparisons. Trend of clock speed and especially single-core boost depends on the temperature. In the summer at higher temperatures, processors may be slower in living spaces than in the winter.

For Intel processors, we register the maximum core temperature for each test, usually of all cores. These maximum values are then averaged and the result is represented by the final value in the graph. From the outputs of single-threaded load, we only pick the registered values from active cores (these are usually two and alternate during the test). It’s a little different with AMD processors. They don’t have temperature sensors for every core. In order for the procedure to be as methodically as possible similar to that applied on Intel processors, the average temperature of all cores is defined by the highest value reported by the CPU Tdie sensor (average). For single-threaded load, however, we already use a CPU sensor (Tctl/Tdie), which usually reports a slightly higher value, which better corresponds to the hotspots of one or two cores. But these values as well as the values from all internal sensors must be taken with a grain of salt, the accuracy of the sensors varies across processors.

Clock speed evaluation is more accurate, each core has its own sensor even on AMD processors. Unlike temperatures, we plot average clock speed values during tests in graphs. We monitor the temperature and clock speed of the processor cores in the same tests, in which we also measure the power consumption. And thus, gradually from the lowest load level on the desktop of idle Windows 10, through audio encoding (single-threaded load), gaming load in three games (F1 2020, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Total War Saga: Troy), to a 10-minute load in Cinebench R23 and the most demanding video encoding with the x264 encoder in HandBrake.

To record the temperatures and clock speed of the processor cores, we use HWiNFO, in which sampling is set to two seconds. With the exception of audio encoding, the graphs always show the averages of all processor cores in terms of temperatures and clock speed. During audio encoding, the values from the loaded core are given.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Test setup

*Following motherboard BIOS versions are used: v1.14 on MSI MEG Z590 Ace, v1E on MSI MEG X570 and v17 on MSI MEG Z490.

Note: Graphics drivers used at the time of testing: Nvidia GeForce 466.77 and OS Windows 10 build 19043.

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

3DMark

We use 3DMark Professional for the tests and the following tests: Night Raid (DirectX 12), Fire Strike (DirectX 11) and Time Spy (DirectX 12). In the graphs you will find partial CPU scores, combined scores, but also graphics scores. You can find out to what extent the given processor limits the graphics card.

---

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: low; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Borderlands 3

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Very Low; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: None; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Counter-Strike: GO

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; lowest graphics settings with no Anti-Aliasing, API: DirectX 9; test platform: script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; high graphics settings with no Anti-Aliasing, API: DirectX 9; test platform: script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API: DirectX 9; test platform: script with Dust 2 map tour.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; very high graphics settings; 4× MSAA, API: DirectX 9; test platform:script with Dust 2 map tour.

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Cyberpunk 2077

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: custom (Little China).

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

DOOM Eternal

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: Vulkan; extra settings: Present From Compute: off, Motion Blur: Low, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: Vulkan; extra settings: Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: Vulkan; extra settings: Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra Nightmare; API: Vulkan; extra settings: Present From Compute: on, Motion Blur: High, Depth of Field Anti-Aliasing: on; test scene: custom.

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

F1 2020

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra Low; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: off, Anisotropic Filtering: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: off, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra High; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: TAA, Skidmarks Blending: off; test scene: built-in benchmark (Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle).

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Metro Exodus

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Extreme; API: DirectX 12; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 11; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00am) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 11; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00am) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 11; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00am) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra; API: DirectX 11; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: custom (Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Air Traffic: AI, February 14, 9:00am) autopilot: from 1000 m until hitting the terrain.

   

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Lowest; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: off; test scene: built-in benchmark.

   

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Highest; API: DirectX 12; extra settings: Anti-Aliasing: TAA; test scene: built-in benchmark.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Total War Saga: Troy

Test environment: resolution: 1280 × 720 px; graphics settings preset: Low; API: DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 1920 × 1080 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 2560 × 1440 px; graphics settings preset: High; API: DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

---

Test environment: resolution: 3840 × 2160 px; graphics settings preset: Ultra; API: DirectX 11; no extra settings; test scene: built-in benchmark.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Overall gaming performance

---

---

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Gaming performance per euro

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

PCMark

Geekbench

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Speedometer (2.0) and Octane (2.0)

Test environment: We’re using a portable version of Google Chrome (91.0.472.101) 64-bit so that real-time results are not affected by browser updates. GPU hardware acceleration is enabled as each user has in the default settings.

---

Note: The values in the graphs represent the average of the points obtained in the subtasks, which are grouped according to their nature into seven categories (Core language features, Memory and GC, Strings and arrays, Virtual machine and GC, Loading and Parsing, Bit and Math operations and Compiler and GC latency).

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Cinebench R20

Cinebench R23

---

Blender@Cycles

Test environment: We use well-known projects BMW (510 tiles) and Classroom (2,040 tiles) and renderer Cycles. Render settings are set to None, with which all the work falls on the CPU.

---

LuxRender (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Adobe Premiere Pro (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Premiere Pro is 15.2.

---

---

---

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

DaVinci Resolve Studio (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests, test type: standard. App version of DaVinci Resolve Studio is 17.2.1 (build 12).

---

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Graphic effects: Adobe After Effects

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe After Effects is 18.2.1.

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

HandBrake

Test environment: For video conversion we’re using a 4K video LG Demo Snowboard with a 43.9 Mb/s bitrate. AVC (x264) and HEVC (x265) profiles are set for high quality and enoder profiles are “slow”. HandBrake version is 1.3.3 (2020061300).

x264 and x265 benchmarks

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Audio encoding

Test environment: Audio encoding is done using command line encoders, we measure the time it takes for the conversion to finish. The same 42-minute long 16-bit WAV file (stereo) with 44.1 kHz is always used (Love Over Gold by Dire Straits album rip in a single audio file).

Encoder settings are selected to achieve maximum or near maximum compression. The bitrate is relatively high, with the exception of lossless FLAC of about 200 200 kb/s.

Note: These tests measure single-thread performance.

FLAC: reference encoder 1.3.2, 64-bit build. Launch options: flac.exe -s -8 -m -e -p -f

MP3: encoder lame3.100.1, 64-bit build (Intel 19 Compiler) from RareWares. Launch options: lame.exe -S -V 0 -q 0

AAC: uses Apple QuickTime libraries, invoked through the application from the command line, QAAC 2.72, 64-bit build, Intel 19 Compiler (does not require installation of the whole Apple package). Launch options: qaac64.exe -V 100 -s -q 2

Opus: reference encoder 1.3.1, Launch options: opusenc.exe –comp 10 –quiet –vbr –bitrate 192

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Broadcasting

Test environment: Applications OBS Studio and Xsplit. We’re using the built-in benchmark (scene Australia, Clear/Dry, Cycle) in F1 2020, in a resolution of 2560 × 1440 px and the same graphics settings, as with standard game performance tests. Thanks to this, we can measure the performance decrease if you record your gameplay with the x264 software encoder while playing. The output is 2560 × 1440 px at 60 fps.

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Adobe Photoshop (PugetBench)

Test environment: set of PugetBench tests. App version of Adobe Photoshop is 22.4.2.

---

---

---

Adobe Lightroom Classic

Test environment: With the settings above, we export 42 uncompressed .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos with a size of 20 Mpx. Then we create 1:1 previews from them, which also represent one of the most processor intensive tasks in Lightroom. The version of Adobe Lightroom Classic is 10.3.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Affinity Photo (benchmark)

Test environment: built-in benchmark.

---

Topaz Labs AI apps

Topaz DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI. These single-purpose applications are used for restoration of low-quality photos. Whether it is high noise (caused by higher ISO), raster level (typically after cropping) or when something needs extra focus. The AI performance is always used.

Test environment: As part of batch editing, 42 photos with a lower resolution of 1920 × 1280 px are processed, with the settings from the images above. DeNoise AI is in version 3.1.2, Gigapixel in 5.5.2 and Sharpen AI in 3.1.2.

XnViewMP

Test environment: XnViewMP is finally a photo-editor for which you don’t have to pay. At the same time, it uses hardware very efficiently. In order to achieve more reasonable comparison times, we had to create an archive of up to 1024 photos, where we we reduce the original resolution of 5472 × 3648 px to 1980 × 1280 px and filters with automatic contrast enhancement and noise reduction are also being applied during this process. We use 64-bit portable version 0.98.4.

Zoner Photo Studio X

Test environment: In Zoner Photo Studio X, we convert 42 .CR2 (RAW Canon) photos to JPEG while keeping the original resolution (5472 × 3648 px) at the lowest possible compression, with the ZPS X profile ”high quality for archival”.

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

WinRAR 6.01

7-Zip 19.00

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

TrueCrypt 7.1a

Aida64 (AES, SHA3)

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Y-cruncher

---

Stockfish 13

Test environment: Host for the Stockfish 13 engine is a chess app Arena 2.0.1, build 2399.

Aida64, FPU tests

---

FSI (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Kirchhoff migration (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Python36 (SPECworkstation 3.1)

SRMP (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Octave (SPECworkstation 3.1)

FFTW (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Convolution (SPECworkstation 3.1)

CalculiX (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

LifeSci (SPECworkstation 3.1)

WPCcfd (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Poisson (SPECworkstation 3.1)

LAMMPS (SPECworkstation 3.1)

NAMD (SPECworkstation 3.1)

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Memory tests…

… and cache (L1, L2, L3)

---

---

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Processor power draw trend

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Average processor power draw

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Performance per watt

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Achieved CPU clock speed

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

CPU temperature

Intel has practically no direct competition in the segment of cheaper processors. The lowest Core i5 CPUs are significantly cheaper than the Ryzen 5 5600X, which is AMD’s entry level in this class. Therefore, this brotherly duel of the new (11400F) with the older (10400F) Core i5 is more attractive than comparing the processors between the two companies. That was also a wish of one of our readers, and now it is finally coming true.

Conclusion

Core i5 processors (and these cheapest models in particular) are designed primarily for less demanding users with regular requirements. Most often it will probably be some gaming, web browsing or occasional photo editing. This needs to be considered when evaluating these processors.

The newer Ci5-11400F is naturally faster, even in the practice of light use. Results from PCMark, which are based on practical tests from real application scripts, show that Rocket Lake is 10% faster even when launching applications. Anyway, it doesn’t matter, whether a web browser or some text editor or graphics editor (PCM tests in Gimp) ready to use in 1.2 or 1.3 seconds. There is a slightly bigger difference in swiftness in the web environment, where the Ci5-10400F can be slower by up to 35–38% according to the Octane and Speedometer tests, which is mainly due to the lower single-threaded performance.

Most of these processors run and will likely run in gaming computers. The difference in game performance is in the range of none to 13 percent. The lower limit corresponds to rare cases of playing in very high resolution. For example in DOOM Eternal or Shadow of the Tomb Raider in UHD (3840 × 2560 px) resolution with the highest graphics settings you can measure the difference at a level below 0.5% even with a high performance graphics card such as the GeForce RTX 3080.

However, most owners of this processor will not be using such a high resolution, and it is more relevant to compare the game performance at lower resolutions at 1080p or 1440p. But Full HD, where the Ci5-11400F compared to Ci5-10400F is only about 9% better on average in games. The highest difference is 23% in Total War Saga: Troy. The harmony of Rocket Lake with high refresh rate monitors thus may be better, for example also in F1 2020, Borderlands 3 or in Metre Exodus. In these games, there is still a relatively large performance difference of about 10%. With higher resolutions, these differences are already shrinking and in QHD (1440p) it is only 5% on average in favor of the Ci5-11400F.

One thing is the higher performance of the Ci5-11400F (Rocket Lake) and the other its higher power draw. Its percentage increase is significantly higher than the increase in RL’s performance. The Ci5-10400F (Comet Lake) can be up to 59% more energy-efficient and thus the Rocket Lake has significantly worse value of gaming performance per watt. And not only gaming performance, but also computing. Although we probably do not have to go too deep in this class and in the evaluation it will be enough to state that the average computing performance of the Ci5-11400F in applications is higher by about 20% on average compared to the Ci5-10400F (whether in 3D rendering, video editing, graphic effects editing or photo editing), but for the price of 60–70% power consumption increase.

It may be even more in video encoding, but there we again point out that Rocket Lake uses the AVX-512 in the default settings with the x264 encoder, which do not add much performance here, but on the contrary significantly increase power consumption and it’s better to manually turn of these 512-bit AVX instructions, by adjusting parameters, etc. However, we will deal with this in even more detail in a separate article.

The significantly higher power draw is given by several factors. First, because Rocket Lake is pushing the clock rate more aggressively and has a much larger chip, which likely also is one of the weaker ones, unsuitable for Core i7 or Core i9. The older Core i5-10400F never even comes close to PL2 values (134 W) and only slightly exceeds the TDP (65 W) with the power consumption of up to 70 W. The new Rocket Lake is already reaching the 154 W limit and although the efficiency and performance per watt values are significantly worse, it is still a processor that can operate without the slightest difficulty even with cheap coolers, the temperatures are relatively low. It also comes with an improved stock cooler, which you can recognize from the Core i7 and Core i9 Comet Lake with locked multipliers. That is, the black one with a copper core. The cooler supplied with the Core i5-10400F is weaker, with a monolithic aluminum heatsink, but due to the lower power consumption of this processor, it will probably be even quieter even with variants with thermal paste under the IHS.

Choosing the “better” processor of these two is extremely difficult and depends on whether you prefer higher performance and increased power consumption (you could then be more interested in the Ci5-11400F) or, conversely, you do not mind the slightly lower performance and the highest possible efficiency (Ci5-10400F) is important to you. In addition, Comet Lake is currently a bit cheaper. But this may change later, or the current price difference of around € 20 may be reduced, and in some markets the price difference between these processors may already be smaller now. The recommended price is the same in both cases. After a long evaluation, we decided to give both the Core i5-11400F and Core i5-10400F our editorial award “Smart buy!”. Rocket Lake has excellent performance in relation to price, and even if we take into account current market prices, Comet Lake usually does not lag far behind it and, moreover, it is always significantly more energy-efficient.

We’ve got the games for our tests from Jama levova

Special thanks to Blackmagic Design (for a licence to DaVinci Resolve Studio), Topaz Labs (for licences to apps DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI) and Zoner (for a licence to Photo Studio X)

• Contents
• Intel Core i5 Rocket and Comet Lake in detail
• Methodology: performance tests
• Methodology: how we measure power draw
• Methodology: temperature and clock speed tests
• Test setup
• 3DMark
• Assassin’s Creed: Valhalla
• Borderlands 3
• Counter-Strike: GO
• Cyberpunk 2077
• DOOM Eternal
• F1 2020
• Metro Exodus
• Microsoft Flight Simulator
• Shadow of the Tomb Raider
• Total War Saga: Troy
• Overall gaming performance
• Gaming performance per euro
• PCMark and Geekbench
• Web performance
• 3D rendering: Cinebench, Blender, ...
• Video 1/2: Adobe Premiere Pro
• Video 2/2: DaVinci Resolve Studio
• Graphic effects: Adobe After Effects
• Video encoding
• Audio encoding
• Broadcasting (OBS and Xsplit)
• Photos 1/2: Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom
• Photos 2/2: Affinity Photo, Topaz Labs AI apps, ZPS X, ...
• (De)compression
• (De)cryption
• Numerical computing
• Simulations
• Memory and cache tests
• Processor power draw trend
• Average processor power draw
• Performance per watt
• Achieved CPU clock speed
• CPU temperature
• Conclusion