Key Differences
In short — Core i5-11600KF outperforms the cheaper Core i3-3240 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-3240 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Core i5-11600KF is 3116 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-3240.
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600KF
- Performs up to 53% better in Dirt 5 than Core i3-3240 - 220 vs 144 FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Core i3-3240 - 12 vs 4 threads
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3240
- Up to 74% cheaper than Core i5-11600KF - $41.0 vs $160.68
- Up to 62% better value when playing Dirt 5 than Core i5-11600KF - $0.28 vs $0.73 per FPS
- Consumes up to 56% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600KF - 55 vs 125 Watts
- Works without a dedicated GPU, while Intel Core i5-11600KF doesn't have integrated graphics
Dirt 5
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
220
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.73/FPS
38.35616438356165%
Price, $
$160.68
25%
FPS Winner
Buy for $160.68 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 348919 minutes ago
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
144
65.45454545454545%
Value, $/FPS
$0.28/FPS
100%
Price, $
$41
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $41 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 348918 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra High
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Single-Core
554
25.22768670309654%
Multi-Core
1137
13.058458711381645%
Intel Core i5-11600KF | vs | Intel Core i3-3240 |
---|---|---|
Mar 16th, 2021 | Release Date | Sep 3rd, 2012 |
Core i5 | Collection | Core i3 |
Rocket Lake | Codename | Ivy Bridge |
Intel Socket 1200 | Socket | Intel Socket 1155 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
6 | Cores | 2 |
12 | Threads | 4 |
3.9 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.4 GHz |
4.9 GHz | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
125 W | TDP | 55 W |
14 nm | Process Size | 22 nm |
39.0x | Multiplier | 34.0x |
None | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2500 |
Yes | Overclockable | No |