Core i5-11400F vs Core i7-620M
Aggregate performance score
i5-11400F outperforms i7-620M by a whopping 762% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2198 | 662 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 32 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 70.98 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Core i7 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Rocket Lake (2021) |
| Release date | 10 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 19 May 2021 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $332 | $157 |
| Current price | $254 (0.8x MSRP) | $107 (0.7x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 2.677 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.33 GHz | 4.4 GHz |
| Bus support | 2500 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 480 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 3 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 12 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 81+114 mm2 | 276 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 382+177 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | BGA1288, PGA988 | LGA1200 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| vPro | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 17.051 GB/s | 50 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 20 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 762% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 761% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 348% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 824% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 79% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 478% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 339% in 3DMark06 CPU.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
Core i7-620M outperforms Core i5-11400F by 340% in wPrime 32.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
Core i5-11400F outperforms Core i7-620M by 632% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.28 | 11.03 |
| Recency | 10 January 2010 | 19 May 2021 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Cost | $332 | $157 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
i7-620M has 85.7% lower power consumption.
i5-11400F, on the other hand, has a 761.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, its recommended price lower by $175, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
The Core i5-11400F is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-620M in performance tests.
Be aware that Core i7-620M is a notebook processor while Core i5-11400F is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-620M and Core i5-11400F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
