First reviews of Intel's Core i5-11400 are in, and it's a worthy competitor to the Ryzen...

The big picture: Since the release of Ryzen 5000, AMD has somewhat abandoned the market segment that had some of their best sellers. They still offer the Ryzen 5 3600, but users were expecting new models in this price range given the history with R5 1600, 2600 and 3600. Unfortunately this did not happen as the 5600X targets a higher price bracket and now it seems that Intel wants to win it back, offering (unofficial?) price reductions for 10th-gen models and introducing the Core i5-11400 with appealing price tag, especially for gamers.

We've been reporting about sales of Intel 10th-gen CPUs, with the Core i5-10400F usually found for under $150. Now with the release of the i5-11400 at $184, it seems that Intel wants to saturate this market segment and steal away AMD's momentum, after having very attractive offerings around $200 for a few years now. Most reviewers agree that the 6-core, 12-thread models were and still are the sweet spot for anybody wanting to use their CPU both for productivity and gaming, offering sizable improvements to a large number of users with older quad core i5 models, but still priced well below CPUs with 8 or more cores.

New Intel CPUs this generation appear to be hit or miss, the Core i5-11600k is a decent offering but the supposed flagship i9-11900k has been a disappointment. Intel is also offering the Core i5-11400, with 6 cores and 12 threads (our review is coming next week). Base specs look almost identical to the i5-10400, a little bit lower base frequency at 2.60 GHz, a little bit higher turbo at 4.40 GHz, same cache and support for faster memory.

With improvements to the Core architecture, the i5-11400 performs well and at this price point it appears to be a very good choice for gamers. Although it does have a few weak points, as shown by Gamers Nexus on the video below: not so strong productivity performance, higher power consumption and lack of overclocking.

If you are looking for a 6-core, 12-thread CPU upgrade now and do not want to wait for upcoming DDR5 platforms, there's plenty of choices from both Intel and AMD.

But perhaps just as important, and contrary to the graphics card market, you can actually find most of these CPUs in stores for reasonable prices. If you are on a budget, an i5-10400F or R5 2600 are good entry points, but for gamers who want a little bit more, the new Core i5-11400 is an attractive choice that is currently undercutting the R5 3600's pricing in the US and Europe.

Permalink to story.

 

Dimitriid

Posts: 691   +1,218
I think AMD might have been just sitting on the non-x 5600 as I am positive they've got at least some chips that might not quite clock at 5600x numbers but slightly lower = no problem. So to me it is possible they just realized intel's 10400 just wouldn't compete at all so they had a chance at selling the higher priced 5600x variant, something that's been notoriously easy to avoid on previous gens as most people know you get a better deal with a 1600, 2600 and 3600 all capable of hitting the "X" variant clocks with minor overclocking even on the AMD cooler.

Then again they might truly have not enough chips and they might not respond to the 11400 at all, but I think in less than a month they'll rollout a non-x 5600.
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
As much as I DON'T like Intel, I'm happy about this and I really hope the 11400 will hit very badly 5600X sales. AMD ridiculous pricing will be affected.
 

noel24

Posts: 733   +887
Oh My God!!!
This is like early 2010s, but with Intel and AMD switching sides.
AMD had garbage top-end, while attracting budget concious clients (mostly fanboys), while being a node or two behind Intel.
Genuinely, I never anticipated This! I believed AMD recent reign is Intel's temporary slip, that They will soon make up with 10nm product, fixing power consumption and spectre/meltdown vulnerabilities, and so on, but It's like 4 years now. Why is Intel still on top in revenue? Who's buying into Their cr*p? How much money do They have to burn before investors notice?
 

TheBigFatClown

Posts: 931   +364
A worthy competitor to the Ryzen 5 3600? Hehehehe, what am I missing here? The freshly baked Intel chip can compete with an AMD CPU that is 2 generations old now? I'm impressed.

It looks a rehash of the past with a lower price tag. Please, somebody feel free to tell me what I'm missing here. I'm sure there is something.
 

Geralt

Posts: 405   +469
TechSpot Elite
Oh My God!!!
This is like early 2010s, but with Intel and AMD switching sides.
AMD had garbage top-end, while attracting budget concious clients (mostly fanboys), while being a node or two behind Intel.
Genuinely, I never anticipated This! I believed AMD recent reign is Intel's temporary slip, that They will soon make up with 10nm product, fixing power consumption and spectre/meltdown vulnerabilities, and so on, but It's like 4 years now. Why is Intel still on top in revenue? Who's buying into Their cr*p? How much money do They have to burn before investors notice?
Well said
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
I think the $300 msrp is fine.

if you are referring to the retail pricing that the sellers are posting that isn't AMD. That is newegg, amazon etc marking up pricing for their own profit margins.
no, it is not.
Not even the MSRP (which is much higher in the rest of the world if you included taxes).
It is a 6C/12T CPU in 2021.
$250 would be the right price, but AMD now think they are too good to have good prices (as it was with Zen 2).
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
A worthy competitor to the Ryzen 5 3600? Hehehehe, what am I missing here? The freshly baked Intel chip can compete with an AMD CPU that is 2 generations old now? I'm impressed.

It looks a rehash of the past with a lower price tag. Please, somebody feel free to tell me what I'm missing here. I'm sure there is something.
Ryzen 5 3600 is ONE generation old. It is Zen 2 and we are at Zen 3 now.
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
Fair enough. So, Intel is only a generation behind AMD now. That's encouraging for competition. But it means Intel is still no longer King!
Intel is no longer the king since a while, to be honest.
But competition is what we want, as customers. Look at what AMD did when they though they were "the best" : Zen 3 at ridiculous prices and every mid-low end tiers cut off (no 5700X, no 5600...).
 

Irata

Posts: 1,512   +2,474
As much as I DON'T like Intel, I'm happy about this and I really hope the 11400 will hit very badly 5600X sales. AMD ridiculous pricing will be affected.
Performance wise, the 11400 vs the 5600x is like a 2600x vs an 8700k. Price difference between the latter is also pretty much the same.

Did the 2600x force Intel to reduce the 8700k‘s pricing ?
 

yeeeeman

Posts: 406   +352
Intel is no longer the king since a while, to be honest.
But competition is what we want, as customers. Look at what AMD did when they though they were "the best" : Zen 3 at ridiculous prices and every mid-low end tiers cut off (no 5700X, no 5600...).
intel is no longer king ain't a surprise. the fact that they can still compete with their process tech from 2000 freaking 15 (that is 2015) is AMAZING. Just imagine where amd would be now while still using the 14nm global foundries process. they would be ****.
 

yeeeeman

Posts: 406   +352
Fair enough. So, Intel is only a generation behind AMD now. That's encouraging for competition. But it means Intel is still no longer King!
amd is king thanks to tsmc.
I'll call amd king when both intel/amd use the tech process tech and amd is better overall. call me when that happens
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 363   +290
Folks are alluding to above a nice low end combo - AMD need to get onto this - Zen4 DDR5, new motherboards , faster M2 drives - it won't be cheap.
We want to be able to build a nice rig - with LOW power consumption for family and friends. CPU $50-$150 options
M/B $60-$100 options GPU $70-$200 , $60 case, Cheap non-modular PSU , cheap memory $60 etc

We can do that at the moment except for GPU - but we don't have new low power variants. It's a large market ( light causal gamers , general users )- TBF you have better integrated graphics chips coming - again with AMD short supply - NUCs are nice - but next level up with 7mm GPU are wanted

Just read the story on Ryzen 5000G APU- they look good - but also a lower cpu -with the same inbuilt GPU
 
Last edited:

HardReset

Posts: 1,132   +723
intel is no longer king ain't a surprise. the fact that they can still compete with their process tech from 2000 freaking 15 (that is 2015) is AMAZING. Just imagine where amd would be now while still using the 14nm global foundries process. they would be ****.
No. Intel's 14nm++ is much better (25% more performance on same power or 52% less power on same performance) than original 14nm. That is around half of improvement GF 14nm vs TSMC 7nm. Also Intel does only compete on performance, not power consumption at all. Overall, not that amazing.

Tbh, 14nm++ should be called 10nm but Intel reserved that for another process...
 

Irata

Posts: 1,512   +2,474
amd is king thanks to tsmc.
I'll call amd king when both intel/amd use the tech process tech and amd is better overall. call me when that happens
Until Zen 3, Intel was always a node, sometimes even 2 ahead. If I remember correctly, that was always seen as a plus for their products, which it was.

I am curious: does your evaluation also include available and invested resources ?

 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,503   +3,739
I think the $300 msrp is fine.

if you are referring to the retail pricing that the sellers are posting that isn't AMD. That is newegg, amazon etc marking up pricing for their own profit margins.
I dont think its fine, we'v ehad 6 core CPUs for under $200 for several years now, AMD's own 8 cores were going for under $300 just a generation. Generally hardware gets CHEAPER over time. $300 for a 6 core in 2021 is a rip off, Especially when AMD's own 3600 was under $200, and the 5600x is nowhere near 50% faster.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,512   +2,474
No. Intel's 14nm++ is much better (25% more performance on same power or 52% less power on same performance) than original 14nm. That is around half of improvement GF 14nm vs TSMC 7nm. Also Intel does only compete on performance, not power consumption at all. Overall, not that amazing.

Tbh, 14nm++ should be called 10nm but Intel reserved that for another process...

Intel themselves even claim a 70% improvement:

Reiterating his earlier claims that all the ticks and pluses added on to the 14nm process have delivered a 70% performance boost compared with the first 14nm Broadwell chips, Krzanich claims anyone else would have taken that extra performance as an opportunity to rename the node.

https://www.pcgamesn.com/intel-throws-shade-on-amd-12nm
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,339   +1,874
I dont think its fine, we'v ehad 6 core CPUs for under $200 for several years now, AMD's own 8 cores were going for under $300 just a generation. Generally hardware gets CHEAPER over time. $300 for a 6 core in 2021 is a rip off, Especially when AMD's own 3600 was under $200, and the 5600x is nowhere near 50% faster.
Pricing it up for everything at the moment.

even intel's 11600k part they are asking $260+ for. We will eventually get back to $300 8 core parts it just won't be right now.

Comet lake 8 core parts are close to that now because of deep discounts.
 

MaxSmarties

Posts: 501   +294
Performance wise, the 11400 vs the 5600x is like a 2600x vs an 8700k. Price difference between the latter is also pretty much the same.

Did the 2600x force Intel to reduce the 8700k‘s pricing ?
the difference is at the time of 2600X introduction, AMD market share and appeal was at the historical minimum. AMD had to fight hard to regain customer's trust...
Today the situation is quite different, and the two competitors are both appealing (even if AMD has a technical advantage for sure).