Question Why Intel's i3 have higher base clock speed than core i5?

[Ehsanul Hoque]

Hi, I dont know how to put this in exact. After searching for the answer on goole I found out that if you want to do light works then lower base clock speed is good enough and if you want to do heavy works then you should go for a higher base clock speed. Since intel turbo boost technology only gets activated when its needed. Which can produce a lot of heat. So if you are doing heavy works and if the temp rises too high then it will get back to base clock speed to protect the cpu from heat even before your works are done. Why I'm asking this is I need to build a computer within few days and my budgets are tight. I can either go for a Core i3 13100F or Core i5 11400F. I like to play games like Apex, and I use after effects and premier pro. Now which processor will better for doing these kind of things without creating any heating or throttling issues. I dont have an AC in my room and in summer it can get really hot in here. I may have to turn off turbo boost if my cooler cant cope up with the heat. There is another option with Ryzen 5600g, But suddenly importes importing the chinese varrient of the processor since they are little cheaper than the international ones. Dont know how good it will be.

 

[rgd1101]

i5 have more core

 

[geofelt]

First of all, I3/i5/i7/i9 no longer designate the number of cores and hyperthreading. They now designate approximate levels of performance.

Next, one can not use clock rates as a measure of performance. 13th gen architecture is some 20% faster per clock than 11th gen.

Of your choices, the i3-13100F is the stronger choice.
Games depend on the performance of the single master thread.
Here is a list of the single thread ratings of the cpu-Z bench test:
https://valid.x86.fr/bench/t3fjgh
13100 scores 678.
11400 scores 561.

Modern motherboards and processors will try to increase performance automatically up to the point where the temperature of a core reaches 100c.
The chips are built to tolerate heat and will slow down if it reaches a dangerous point.

The base clock is relatively meaningless.

One other thing, consider paying some $25 more for the non F version of a chip
Having integrated graphics available can help diagnose graphics card issues and keep you going.
As a plus, it includes quick sync.
https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...uick-sync-video/quick-sync-video-general.html

 

[TerryLaze]

i5 have more core

It's not just the cores, the 11400 has a max TDP of 65W while the 13100 can go up to 89, the i3 also has more power.

I dont have an AC in my room and in summer it can get really hot in here. I may have to turn off turbo boost if my cooler cant cope up with the heat.

Neither 65 nor 89W is going to produce any noticeable heat, even the cheapest coolers will handle that without issues.

 

[Ehsanul Hoque]

i5 have more core

So i5 will be faster for rendering than i3 even if the i5 has lower base clock speed?

 

[geofelt]

So i5 will be faster for rendering than i3 even if the i5 has lower base clock speed?

The i5 has 12 processing threads and the i3 has 8.
If you have an app that can keep all 12 threads 100% busy then the i5 will be marginally faster. 17319 compared to 15611 passmark rating.

 

[rgd1101]

both of the cpu don't have igpu. rendering is done on the gpu

 

[Ehsanul Hoque]

The i5 has 12 processing threads and the i3 has 8.
If you have an app that can keep all 12 threads 100% busy then the i5 will be marginally faster. 17319 compared to 15611 passmark rating.

I'm still unable to make my mind. What do u say, which processor should i take? Saw somewhere someone was saying he should have took the 11th gen i5 instead of 12th gen i3 for those 2 extra cores. And yeah it was in the time of 12th gen processors. Now its 13th. And for the gpu I got a 1050ti.

 

[Ehsanul Hoque]

both of the cpu don't have igpu. rendering is done on the gpu

I got 1050ti 4gb as the gpu

 

[geofelt]

My thought is that it is better to have good gaming performance with the I3.
Longer batch times are more tolerable.

 

[jnjnilson6]

I'm still unable to make my mind. What do u say, which processor should i take? Saw somewhere someone was saying he should have took the 11th gen i5 instead of 12th gen i3 for those 2 extra cores. And yeah it was in the time of 12th gen processors. Now its 13th. And for the gpu I got a 1050ti.

The i5-11400F is undoubtedly the faster of the two. However it runs on the LGA1200 socket and the Core i3-13100F runs on the LGA1700 socket. Which means that the update margin of the latter socket would be bigger than that of the former (with LGA1700 you'll be able to upgrade from the entire assortment of 12th and 13th gen CPUs one day when the i3-13100F gets too slow and those generations are much faster than the previous generations supported by LGA1200).

However, if we care only about performance and care about that currently between the two CPUs, the i5-11400F as I'd stated previously is definitely faster than the i3-13100F and the benchmarks show it.

 

[TerryLaze]

The i5-11400F is undoubtedly the faster of the two. However it runs on the LGA1200 socket and the Core i3-13100F runs on the LGA1700 socket. Which means that the update margin of the latter socket would be bigger than that of the former (with LGA1700 you'll be able to upgrade from the entire assortment of 12th and 13th gen CPUs one day when the i3-13100F gets too slow and those generations are much faster than the previous generations supported by LGA1200).

However, if we care only about performance and care about that currently between the two CPUs, the i5-11400F as I'd stated previously is definitely faster than the i3-13100F and the benchmarks show it.

Faster for cinebench does not mean faster for games....
Also with an 1050ti there will be zero difference until the GPU gets upgraded, and if that is a few years in the future then it's better to have the newer platform at that time.

 

[geofelt]

The cinebench tests measure fully loaded cores, and indeed the 11400 is a bit faster in that environment.
But for daily desktop work and gaming, the 13100 is likely to be more satisfying.

 

[jnjnilson6]

The two previous comments are immersive and indubitably illuminating.

I have provided a more inner perception of the capability of the processors, the highest in terms of stress and summary integration within the higher particulars of rendering. It is with this that the beauty and perception of capability is measured most firmly. That does not by any means discountenance that a lighter form of testing, such as gaming, may prove the opposite in terms of the performance and productivity of both components.

What I did try to regard would be the scenario in which said processors were put under that pivotal and cardinal pressure which would task them to the brim. This would bring the full and indefatigable view of their performance in the most daunting of circumstances. And it would be quite true within the chief and cardinal means of productivity and innate staunchness portrayed in an indefinite and impeccable sphere; measuring a type of performance that is most innate in the realm of truer and higher capability; that which withers not in the succulent frame-like numerals in the gaming experience, but which portrays a harder stone-hard capacity and incisiveness that surely encircles all the particulars of productivity.