[SOLVED] i5-10400F vs 10600KF - Which one is the better?

[mranimo]

Which is better for gaming and productivity? Which one is more energy efficient? Why would you choose one instead the other?
In the country where I live the 10600KF is 60$ cheaper.

I have 16gb dualkit trident royal 3200mhz rams in an MSI Z490 Gaming Plus board.

My main video card is an MSI GAMING TRIO 1080TI gpu.
My secondary video card is an MSI 970 100ME for extra displays, if it matters.

 

[jay32267]

Here are some benchmarks.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-10600KF+@+4.10GHz&id=3810

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-11400F+@+2.60GHz&id=4226

Very close in single thread.

11400f is faster multithread

 

[geofelt]

Also, I5-11400f comes with an adequate stock cooler; most of the $60 difference will need to be spent on a cooler for the K.

 

[Alex Storm]

The question is about the 10400f and 10600kf processors, and here the answer is obvious -10600kf for a mobo on the Z chipset, which can be cooled without any problems with an air cooler, for example, Scythe Mugen 5 Rev.B, without extreme overclocking

 

[TDsouza007]

Here are some benchmarks.

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-10600KF+@+4.10GHz&id=3810

https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i5-11400F+@+2.60GHz&id=4226

Very close in single thread.

11400f is faster multithread

I've been contemplating between the two too. Just confused, what exactly does the CPUMark score represent. Is it a score taking into consideration everything (Price, Performance, Power Usage), or something purely based on performance.

Kinda confused how a 2.4GHz faired better than a 4.1GHz considering both have the same number of cores, threads and cache.

 

[jay32267]

The score is just performance.

"Kinda confused how a 2.4GHz faired better than a 4.1GHz considering both have the same number of cores, threads and cache. "

The 11400F supports 3200 RAM and the 10600KF only supports 2666......so this may be why.

 

[Phaaze88]

Kinda confused how a 2.4GHz faired better than a 4.1GHz considering both have the same number of cores, threads and cache.

The base clock and advertised TDP are pretty much a lie, unless the user goes into bios and disables Turbo Boost(for whatever reason).
Even the single core turbo frequency is a lie; because of the OS never being idle, it's easy to utilize 2 or more cores with little effort.
The multi core frequencies are the real clock speeds.
11400 has an all core turbo of 4.2ghz, 4.3ghz with 3-4 cores active, 4.4ghz for 1-2 cores.
10600K does 4.5ghz all core, 4.7ghz at 4 cores, 4.8ghz with 1-3 active.

^That, and the differences in Instructions Per Clock(IPC) can either cpu can do, as well as ram speed, influence things.

 

[geofelt]

First of all, passmark does not have a great number of submissions for each. Perhaps 50.

The 11400 is 11th gen so the cpu performance per clock is perhaps 19% better than the 10th gen 10600k
The clocks of each are at stock.
But each processor can go faster if conditions permit.
On a few cores, they each can turbo up higher. 4.8 on the 10600k.
And 4.4 on the 11400. But, when you consider that 11400 is faster per clock, they become similar.

Then, there is overclocking, and you can bet that most passmark 10600k submissions were from overclocked systems.
Overclocking is of advantage in a system where all of the 12 threads can be fully utilized.
Not so much in gaming where allowing the turbo mechanism is likely more productive.

You would do about as well with either. For simplicity, I would favor the newer gen and turbo.
Here is a gaming review of the 11400:

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

The Core i5-11400F coupled with a B560 motherboard make for an interesting build configuration, as it's significantly cheaper than the Core i5-11600K/Z590 and less than the cost...

www.techspot.com

They are comparable.

I might clarify ram support.
The supported speed is what will get you into the bios where you can set faster speeds if the motherboard permits.
How fast depends on both the ram, motherboard chipset as well as the cpu.
B560 and Z590 motherboards permit ram overclocking.
Then, also, do not overpay for fast ram in intel. Performance differences are minor if you are using a discrete graphics card. Think <5%.

 

[Karadjgne]

10600k is a waste. Performance wise, it's factory clocks give it a slight advantage over the 10400. Not enough to warrant the price difference. The only real difference is the unlocked processor, which if you over-spend on a Z board will allow the use of higher speed ram and things like locked core OC.

Which can broaden the gap in Maximum fps possible, but if that maximum is above monitor refresh, it's a moot point, not going to make a hill of beans difference to game play.

Same applies to the 11400 and 11600k, except the 11400 has unlocked XMP, so the only thing really affected is clock speeds.

There isn't a $60 difference between the 10400 and 10600k. That's just the start. Also consider the difference between a decent B motherboard for the 10400 and the stupid pricing of the Z490/590 motherboards to allow the OC on the 10600k.

If OC is the focus, pay through the nose for the 10600k. If OC isn't a bother, the 10400 is much better value. Otherwise there's very little realistic difference

 

[animekenji]

10600k is a waste. Performance wise, it's factory clocks give it a slight advantage over the 10400. Not enough to warrant the price difference. The only real difference is the unlocked processor, which if you over-spend on a Z board will allow the use of higher speed ram and things like locked core OC.

Which can broaden the gap in Maximum fps possible, but if that maximum is above monitor refresh, it's a moot point, not going to make a hill of beans difference to game play.

Same applies to the 11400 and 11600k, except the 11400 has unlocked XMP, so the only thing really affected is clock speeds.

There isn't a $60 difference between the 10400 and 10600k. That's just the start. Also consider the difference between a decent B motherboard for the 10400 and the stupid pricing of the Z490/590 motherboards to allow the OC on the 10600k.

If OC is the focus, pay through the nose for the 10600k. If OC isn't a bother, the 10400 is much better value. Otherwise there's very little realistic difference

The resolution that you game at can also have a big effect. I was reading some benchmarks using actual games earlier today putting the i3 10100, the i5 10400, and the i7 10700 against each other, and at 1080p, the results were what you would expect, with the 10700 in the lead, the 10400 next, followed by the 10100. Increase the resolution to 4k, however, and it's not so clear cut. There was only 6-7 frames separating the i7 from the i3 and only 2-3 frames separating the i7 from the i5. That makes it more worthwhile to invest in a 4k monitor, and do all your gaming at that resolution, than an i7 processor. I'm guessing that games still aren't optimizing to take best advantage of CPU's with more than 4C/8T yet.

 

[Karadjgne]

Market. The largest market is ppl who own 8thread cpus. Whether that's older i7's, 9700/k, or newer Intels and pretty much all Ryzen. So that's what games are optimized for. GTA:V is a perfect example, it'll play on a 4 thread cpu, play better on a 6 thread, but plays best on 8 threads.

Meaning it has the largest possible retail possibility. But sooner or later, the code complexity of games will force devs to start optimizing for 12 thread cpus, meaning they'll play on an 8, best on a 12, but quads and 6 thread cpus will be what most would consider unplayable.

It's basically what's already happened with current Pentium and older i3's etc.

 

[animekenji]

Until games start being optimized for more cores/threads, you're not going to see as much of an advantage with 6C/12T CPU's as you might think. I saw tests where the Ryzen 3 3300X games better than a Ryzen 5 3600, because it has faster clocks than the 3600. The extra cores and threads of the Ryzen 5 were meaningless in games that optimize for 4C/8T. As a workstation CPU, you'll see the advantage of more cores and threads, but very few games as of yet will take full advantage. That will change going forward, though, now that 4C/8T are considered entry level CPU's, and not high end anymore.

 

[Karadjgne]

Depends on usage. If a game is using 8 threads, and you are streaming discord, and have a YouTube channel or 3 running, then the extra threads not in use by the game can make sense.

It's a gamble. I simultaneously owned an i5-3570k and i7-3770K. Ppl said I didn't need to spend the extra $100 for the i7 at the time. Few short years later, the i5 can't handle the workload. I just replaced the i7 a year ago.

Times change, software changes, requirements change and its totally unpredictable as to when or by how much.

 

[Joseph_138]

The score is just performance.

"Kinda confused how a 2.4GHz faired better than a 4.1GHz considering both have the same number of cores, threads and cache. "

The 11400F supports 3200 RAM and the 10600KF only supports 2666......so this may be why.

You can run faster memory with 10600Kf if you overclock it on a Z chipset motherboard. I wouldn't even bother putting a 10600K or Kf on a B or H chipset board.

 

[Why_Me]

You can run faster memory with 10600Kf if you overclock it on a Z chipset motherboard. I wouldn't even bother putting a 10600K or Kf on a B or H chipset board.

https://www.gigabyte.com/Motherboard/B560M-AORUS-ELITE-rev-10#kf
11th Generation Intel Core i9/i7/i5 processors:
Support for DDR4 5333(O.C.)/ DDR4 5133(O.C.)/DDR4 5000(O.C.)/4933(O.C.)/4800(O.C.)/ 4700(O.C.)/ 4600(O.C.)/ 4500(O.C.)/ 4400(O.C.)/ 4300(O.C.)/4266(O.C.) / 4133(O.C.) / 4000(O.C.) / 3866(O.C.) / 3800(O.C.) / 3733(O.C.) / 3666(O.C.) / 3600(O.C.) / 3466(O.C.) / 3400(O.C.) / 3333(O.C.) / 3300(O.C.) / 3200 / 3000 / 2933 / 2800 / 2666 / 2400 / 2133 MHz memory modules

https://www.asus.com/Motherboards-Components/Motherboards/TUF-Gaming/TUF-GAMING-B560M-PLUS/
DDR4 5000(OC)/4800(OC)/4600(OC)/4400(OC)/4266(OC)/4000(OC)/3733(OC)/3600(OC)/3466(OC)/3333(OC)/3200/2933/2800/2666/2400/2133 MHz

 

[Karadjgne]

Intel opened up memory scaling for 11th gen cpus and 5 series mobo's. Now the only thing held back from OC is clock speeds above default.