Intel i5-11500 Review – Better Buy Than 11400F?

Whatever may be cialis professional cheap your age, you can take Kamagra erection-helping medicine. It was first cialis 10 mg time prepared by Pfizer scientists. In order to achieve buy viagra in spain cute-n-tiny.com a proper erection, there must be an acceptable arousing incitement and yearning to have closeness. Ejaculatory management: – It is thought about this order generic cialis necessary to memorize that the dilemma with Premature Ejaculation is not a rare case.

This is Intel’s i5-11500, the ever-so-slightly bigger brother to the 11400, but not quite as fancy as the 11600K. It sits right in between the two of these, all of them are 6 core, 12 thread chips and all of the non-K chips have the same 65W TDP. In fact, the only difference between this and the 11400 is a slightly higher base and boost clock – 2.7GHz base instead of 2.6GHz, and 4.6GHz max boost instead of 4.4GHz, plus the 11500 runs Intel’s UHD 750 graphics rather than the 11400 running UHD 730. But is that difference worth the extra £10, or the extra £30 over the 11400F? Let’s test them and find out.

I want to start with a quick rundown of the spec of this chip so you know what to expect. Like I said, this is a 6 core, 12 thread CPU with a base clock of 2.7GHz and a max boost of up to 4.6GHz. That’s it’s maximum single core boost speed though, the max this will hit all core is 4.2GHz which is actually the exact same as the 11400 and 11400F. It does come with integrated graphics, UHD 750, and supports up to 3200MHz RAM. To make it clear, you can very easily use this with faster memory but that is considered “out of spec” by Intel and would void your CPU’s warranty.

So based on the spec, it should have slightly stronger single core performance thanks to the higher single core boost including potentially in games, but should be almost identical to the 11400 when it comes to multi-threaded workloads. Well, I’ve got an 11400F, an 11600K, 10400F, a Ryzen 5600X and a 3600 so lets get testing.

Starting with the CPU specific workloads and Cinebench, somewhat unsurprisingly the specs don’t lie. In the single threaded test, the 11500 scores 550 points, 26 points higher than the 11400F, but 43 points shy of the 11600K. Much like the rest of the 11th gen chips, it holds a convincing lead over the last gen 10400F and even the Ryzen 3600 but can’t keep up with AMD’s new 5th gen 5600X.

In multi-threaded, again the spec sheet rings true. The 11500 scores within 50 points of the 11400F making it a whisker faster but not by much. It’s still nearly 1000 points faster than the 10400F and holds 400 over the 3600, with only the faster 11600K and Ryzen 5600X leading by 300 and 400 points respectively.

Blender is the same story. The BMW scene has the two locked i5’s running within just a second of each other. The 11600K runs around 20 seconds faster, whereas the 5600X is only 3 seconds ahead. The 3600 runs 20 seconds slower, and the 10400F trails at over 45 seconds slower.

In Gooseberry the 3600’s ability to be more consistent in holding on boost means it actually squeezes out a slight advantage over the 11400F – only by 11 seconds across a 20 minute render but expresses the difference in boost technique nicely. The 11500 managed a better show running a touch over a minute faster than the 11400F, although still nearly two minutes slower than the 11600K, which itself is another 30 seconds slower than the Ryzen 5600X.

So, in CPU specific tasks, the spec sheet really tells you the whole story, at least compared to the 11400 and 11600K. Any results you see from an 11400, if they are single threaded you can add 4.5% and know pretty much exactly what the 11500 would get, and if it’s multi threaded you can pretty much assume it’s either the same or a hair faster. But gaming is rarely that clear cut, so how does it fair there?

Well, in Watchdogs Legion, it’s pretty much identical to the 11400F. It technically ran with a lower 1% score, but I wouldn’t read too heavily into that. Otherwise the 3600 lags behind along with the 10400F, and both the 11600K and 5600X hold a slight advantage but not by much.

Cyberpunk is similar. The 11500 sits nicely in the middle of the pack at 87FPS average, with the 11400F only 1FPS behind. All of the 11th gen chips are a hair faster than either Ryzen, although the 3600 does struggle more hitting just 72FPS compared to the best result from the 11600K or 91FPS.

CSGO shows great linearity in performance, the slower your CPU the lower the performance you get, and vice versa. The 5600X comes out on top here with a healthy margin. The 11500 sits nicely between the 11400F and 11600K – although I should add there is a fair bit of variability in the results you’ll get here so don’t take these values as absolutes.

Fortnite also works out well, with the 11500 again offering a nice split in performance between the two other 11th gen chips, and doing a better job than the older 3600 and 10400F. The spread in performance isn’t all that massive, only about 25FPS from the slowest to fastest and all with pretty consistent 1% low figures too.

Finally in Microsoft Flight the trend is continued with the 11500 hitting 38FPS average, 2FPS shy of the 11600K but 2FPS faster than the 11400F. It’s also ahead of both the 10400F and 3600, although the 5600X trounces them all with 44FPS average and a stronger 25FPS in the 1% lows.

So yes, the 11500 is a touch faster in most games than the 11400F and not quite as fast as the 11600K. Much like both, they currently offer a better value proposition especially when paired with a cheaper B560 motherboard like the one I’ve been testing with. You will need a good CPU cooler though, as much like the 11400, with the power limits increased (as the board I’m using does by default), this chip choked back a peak of 150W. Compared to either Ryzen chip which are capped at 88W of socket power that’s kind of insane. It is very much in line with the other 11th gen chips though, and under full load shares the same power consumption as the 11400F.

So, should you pick the 11500 over the 11400? Well, if you were going to get the version with integrated graphics, I’d say yes. While I haven’t touched on them here, the UHD 750 graphics on the 11500 have 32 execution units instead of the 24 you get on the 11400. While I wouldn’t exactly recommend gaming on it, if that’s important to you it’s clear which you should head for. If, however, you were planning on saving a buck and getting the 11400F – the one without the iGPU onboard – then I’d probably say it’s not worth spending the extra. That extra £30 could easily be spent elsewhere, like getting a better cooler as I’d argue a well cooled 11400F is going to outperform an undercooled 11500 that can’t stay on boost.

Should you be considering Ryzen instead? Well, unless you are looking at a used 3600 for a great price I’d say that’s out of the running now, but the 5600X actually poses an interesting proposition now it’s been lowered to £260. Since a B550 board is still £20-30 cheaper like-for-like, and you don’t need as good a cooler, those factors help offset the CPU’s higher asking price. Of course if integrated graphics are a priority for you, until AMD launches the 5600G slated for the start of August, Ryzen is off the table. But if it’s not, well it’s sure a lot more of a tough decision to make.