Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600KF outperforms the cheaper Core i3-10320 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-10320 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-11600KF is 320 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-10320.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-10320
- Up to 20% cheaper than Core i5-11600KF - €151.33 vs €188.75
- Up to 14% better value when playing Battlefield IV than Core i5-11600KF - €0.36 vs €0.42 per FPS
- Consumes up to 48% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600KF - 65 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-11600KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600KF
- Performs up to 8% better in Battlefield IV than Core i3-10320 - 453 vs 421 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-10320 - 12 vs 8 threads
Battlefield IV
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
FPS
421
92%
Value, €/FPS
€0.36/FPS
100%
Price, €
€151.33
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €151.33 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11248 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
453
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.42/FPS
85%
Price, €
€188.75
80%
FPS Winner
Buy for €188.75 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 11248 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Apr 30th, 2020
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-10320 | vs | Intel Core i5-11600KF |
---|---|---|
Apr 30th, 2020 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Core i3 | Collection | Core i5 |
Comet Lake | Codename | Rocket Lake |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
8 | Threads | 12 |
3.8 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
4.6 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
65 W | TDP | 125 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
38.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
UHD Graphics 630 | Integrated Graphics | None |
No | Overclockable | Yes |