Intel Core i5-11400F Review: The New Value Champ

BSim500

Posts: 793   +1,745
The problem is that we are way past the peak at what manual OCing adds for value for money in any linear manner. Eg, I remember taking a Celeron 366 and OC'ing that +50% to 550MHz with no extra cost beyond having to buy a larger CPU cooler for £12 (+50% performance for +10% cost). Today though, those figures are flipped around and that last +10% performance costs almost +50% by the time you've added up the "unlock premium" for K chips, Z boards, greater cooling capacity, etc, it can easily end up more than simply buying the next locked CPU up.

Perfect example - the biggest performance upgrade to the i5-10400F isn't an i5-10600K / i5-11600K. It's still a B460 + i7-10700F (3/4 of the price of a 5600X in many regions and not far off the 10700K in the article), with still no real reason to buy "budget" Rocket Lake at current B560 premium board prices (and nor is a B460 lack of compatibility going to be much of an issue in the big picture of things given Rocket Lake's incredibly short predicted lifespan swiftly followed by yet another new socket in 6 months time...)
 

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,446   +3,596
The problem is that we are way past the peak at what manual OCing adds for value for money in any linear manner. Eg, I remember taking a Celeron 366 and OC'ing that +50% to 550MHz with no extra cost beyond having to buy a larger CPU cooler for £12 (+50% performance for +10% cost). Today though, those figures are flipped around and that last +10% performance costs almost +50% by the time you've added up the "unlock premium" for K chips, Z boards, greater cooling capacity, etc, it can easily end up more than simply buying the next locked CPU up.

Perfect example - the biggest performance upgrade to the i5-10400F isn't an i5-10600K / i5-11600K. It's still a B460 + i7-10700F (3/4 of the price of a 5600X in many regions and not far off the 10700K in the article), with still no real reason to buy "budget" Rocket Lake at current B560 premium board prices (and nor is a B460 lack of compatibility going to be much of an issue in the big picture of things given Rocket Lake's incredibly short predicted lifespan swiftly followed by yet another new socket in 6 months time...)
It really isnt a problem for the consumer though. ACtually its great for us, we can get 95% of OC performance for the price a core i3 was going for not 3 years ago. And we dont have to buy silly $300+ motherboards anymore, since OCing isnt really a big deal.

Same with GPUs, shortage aside, unless you are pushing bleeding edge resolutions you dont need high end GPUs to max out everything these days.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,439   +2,318
Thanks for the review - for a budget gaming rig the 11400F does indeed look very good. For productivity perhaps a bit less.

Big thanks for testing this with a mid range board, even if that is a premium option in that tier. This is much preferable to testing budget CPU on $400+ mainboards. Now if you had used a $20 tower cooler that does the job , this would have been even better.

 

Wrinkle

Posts: 53   +42
Honestly the 400 series are fine cpu's for gaming. My previous setup was a 2060 combined with a 9400. Perfect for 1080p gaming and very potent for 1440p gaming. Throw in freesync/gsync and you'll have a wonderful experience.
 

Raendor

Posts: 21   +16
Ok, so I bought 11400f together with asus b560-I rog mobo for my itx build as I managed to get 6800xt Midnight Black for msrp. Was looking at 5600x initially, but I paid €330 for cpu and mobo while 5600x by itself costs €339 in NL. Would rather switch to lga1700/zen 4 and put the difference in there. I play at 1440p high-ultra anyways.
 

Raendor

Posts: 21   +16
The problem is that we are way past the peak at what manual OCing adds for value for money in any linear manner. Eg, I remember taking a Celeron 366 and OC'ing that +50% to 550MHz with no extra cost beyond having to buy a larger CPU cooler for £12 (+50% performance for +10% cost). Today though, those figures are flipped around and that last +10% performance costs almost +50% by the time you've added up the "unlock premium" for K chips, Z boards, greater cooling capacity, etc, it can easily end up more than simply buying the next locked CPU up.

Perfect example - the biggest performance upgrade to the i5-10400F isn't an i5-10600K / i5-11600K. It's still a B460 + i7-10700F (3/4 of the price of a 5600X in many regions and not far off the 10700K in the article), with still no real reason to buy "budget" Rocket Lake at current B560 premium board prices (and nor is a B460 lack of compatibility going to be much of an issue in the big picture of things given Rocket Lake's incredibly short predicted lifespan swiftly followed by yet another new socket in 6 months time...)

No idea why you complain about b560 prices. It launched with the same pricing as b460 counterparts in europe. I paid €170 for nice asus rog itx board while it has more features in comparison to b460 that costs the same then and now too.
 

meric

Posts: 313   +309
What's the max clock speed this chip can maintain on all cores on a b560 board with a good air cooler? Would be interesting to see boost behaviour in a long term gaming run.
 

Irata

Posts: 1,439   +2,318
No idea why you complain about b560 prices. It launched with the same pricing as b460 counterparts in europe. I paid €170 for nice asus rog itx board while it has more features in comparison to b460 that costs the same then and now too.
Are you sure ? I had a hard time finding release prices for the B460 Tomahawk but the HardwareLuxx review states that the lowest price at time of review was €129, the cheapest price I could find for the B560 version is €175, that‘s almost €50 or 36% more.

This could be a similar situation as with B450 vs B550 boards where prices went up due to better materials (e.g. PCB) for PCIe 4 support and often better features.
Also, I am not sure who would have bought an expensive high end B460 mainboard due to the large differences in what it allowed you to do vs Z490.

Would really be interested in a review comparing the B560 Tomahawk to its B460 predecessor.
 

Raendor

Posts: 21   +16
Are you sure ? I had a hard time finding release prices for the B460 Tomahawk but the HardwareLuxx review states that the lowest price at time of review was €129, the cheapest price I could find for the B560 version is €175, that‘s almost €50 or 36% more.

This could be a similar situation as with B450 vs B550 boards where prices went up due to better materials (e.g. PCB) for PCIe 4 support and often better features.
Also, I am not sure who would have bought an expensive high end B460 mainboard due to the large differences in what it allowed you to do vs Z490.

Would really be interested in a review comparing the B560 Tomahawk to its B460 predecessor.
Telling exactly as it is. I’m not looking outside of itx boards as I have no interest in ATX, but z490 were all around €250+ mark, decent b460 or h470 were going around 140-160 (msi had front usb type c connection for example), while z590 begin around €260-270 and good b560 around €160-170, just like the one I bought. I don’t think €160 for a quality b560 itx board with strong vrm and enough ports is a lot to ask.
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,297   +1,801
"Also, the 11400F is in stock and should be easy to purchase for the foreseeable future, which is not something we can say about any of AMD’s Zen 3 processors. What a crazy time we’re living in."

I think this only applies to the 5900X and 5950X which is not a competitor for this chip. I can see tons of stock of the 5600X and 5800X at my local computer store.
 

Dimitrios

Posts: 779   +605
The problem is that we are way past the peak at what manual OCing adds for value for money in any linear manner. Eg, I remember taking a Celeron 366 and OC'ing that +50% to 550MHz with no extra cost beyond having to buy a larger CPU cooler for £12 (+50% performance for +10% cost). Today though, those figures are flipped around and that last +10% performance costs almost +50% by the time you've added up the "unlock premium" for K chips, Z boards, greater cooling capacity, etc, it can easily end up more than simply buying the next locked CPU up.

Perfect example - the biggest performance upgrade to the i5-10400F isn't an i5-10600K / i5-11600K. It's still a B460 + i7-10700F (3/4 of the price of a 5600X in many regions and not far off the 10700K in the article), with still no real reason to buy "budget" Rocket Lake at current B560 premium board prices (and nor is a B460 lack of compatibility going to be much of an issue in the big picture of things given Rocket Lake's incredibly short predicted lifespan swiftly followed by yet another new socket in 6 months time...)


same here!
 

Irata

Posts: 1,439   +2,318
Telling exactly as it is. I’m not looking outside of itx boards as I have no interest in ATX, but z490 were all around €250+ mark, decent b460 or h470 were going around 140-160 (msi had front usb type c connection for example), while z590 begin around €260-270 and good b560 around €160-170, just like the one I bought. I don’t think €160 for a quality b560 itx board with strong vrm and enough ports is a lot to ask.
Totally agree. Just remember the whining when B550 boards were released like „why is the B550 Tomahawk more expensive than B450“. I have the latter which for €100 is a great board, but the B550 version is what I would have bought even for the higher price due to its higher build quality and better features.
 

Lew Zealand

Posts: 1,813   +1,967
TechSpot Elite
Honestly the 400 series are fine cpu's for gaming. My previous setup was a 2060 combined with a 9400. Perfect for 1080p gaming and very potent for 1440p gaming. Throw in freesync/gsync and you'll have a wonderful experience.

Pretty much what I game with: i5-8400 & GTX 1080 on a B360, 1440p Freesync. I'd love to have that 11400 though for 50% more performance but the 50% more performance I already have over the previous gen 7400 is very welcome.

Of course I'm posting from an R3 1200 & 5600 XT on B450 but nvm that...
 

Puiu

Posts: 4,588   +3,410
TechSpot Elite
Honestly the 400 series are fine cpu's for gaming. My previous setup was a 2060 combined with a 9400. Perfect for 1080p gaming and very potent for 1440p gaming. Throw in freesync/gsync and you'll have a wonderful experience.
It should actually be better for 1440p than 1080p :)
 

Alfatawi Mendel

Posts: 102   +164
IMHO...This still cannot beat the AMD 3600 for value, especially if you factor in the price of a useful cooling solution, and motherboard.
It performs only a smidgen below the 11400, but is MUCH cheaper. AND there is an upgrade path if you so wish.
 

Raendor

Posts: 21   +16
IMHO...This still cannot beat the AMD 3600 for value, especially if you factor in the price of a useful cooling solution, and motherboard.
It performs only a smidgen below the 11400, but is MUCH cheaper. AND there is an upgrade path if you so wish.
You must’ve skipped all the benchmarks in this article to claim that 3600 is somehow better.
 

Tantor

Posts: 130   +168
Another excellent TechSpot article! I agree that the 11400 is a great value for gamers.

I have been a die-hard AMD fan for over 25 years, but must say that these RL processors aren't half-bad. They have great single threaded and gaming performance, which is what most gamers are looking for. My main criticism is the occasional high power draw. But that's a moot point for gamers.
 

UdyrL

Posts: 19   +27
You must’ve skipped all the benchmarks in this article to claim that 3600 is somehow better.
Alfatawi never said the 3600 is better, but that the difference in performance between the 3600 and 11400F doesn't justify the difference in cost to consider it the best value option, to which I somewhat agree. You can run the 3600 with the boxed cooler in many applications and games without reaching dangerous temps or even throttling, and even using a sub $100 motherboard. Based on this review, you'd need an aftermarket cooler for the Intel CPU along with a somewhat more expensive mobo.
 

HardReset

Posts: 1,109   +688
Alfatawi never said the 3600 is better, but that the difference in performance between the 3600 and 11400F doesn't justify the difference in cost to consider it the best value option, to which I somewhat agree. You can run the 3600 with the boxed cooler in many applications and games without reaching dangerous temps or even throttling, and even using a sub $100 motherboard. Based on this review, you'd need an aftermarket cooler for the Intel CPU along with a somewhat more expensive mobo.
Also there are no upgrade paths for 11400. While on AM4 socket you can double cores (5900X) or even more (5950X), LGA1200 best CPU is 11900K that's not worthwhile.

Considering that and also higher power consumption, 3600 is much better choice.
 

Raendor

Posts: 21   +16
Alfatawi never said the 3600 is better, but that the difference in performance between the 3600 and 11400F doesn't justify the difference in cost to consider it the best value option, to which I somewhat agree. You can run the 3600 with the boxed cooler in many applications and games without reaching dangerous temps or even throttling, and even using a sub $100 motherboard. Based on this review, you'd need an aftermarket cooler for the Intel CPU along with a somewhat more expensive mobo.
If you stick to tdp limits - stock is fine. They tested it with those disabled. Look at wattage - it’s higher than 5600x, but not by any long mile. You won’t run 5600x on simple cooler either if you want the best from it.

difference in cost? 11400f is already €150-160 in EU, while 3600 is close to €200. Decent cheap b560 mobos can be had here for a bit more than €100. All I see is that it’s priced on all sides better.
 

Raendor

Posts: 21   +16
Also there are no upgrade paths for 11400. While on AM4 socket you can double cores (5900X) or even more (5950X), LGA1200 best CPU is 11900K that's not worthwhile.

Considering that and also higher power consumption, 3600 is much better choice.
It’s not worthwhile to buy a cpu with a mindset of upgrade path when the next gens midrange will most likely put even 5900x to shame and will cost far less.
 

kiwigraeme

Posts: 324   +258
As others alluded to the 3600 jumped out as best option - it's only 1080p gaming that 11400f pulls away - How realistic is the test build 0% will put this with a 3080/3090

However 1440 monitor a 3060/2060 at msrp price buy the 3600- or if 1080p buy rtx1660
the gaming difference will be tiny