i5-11400H vs Celeron M 560
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 779 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 35 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron M | Tiger Lake |
| Power efficiency | no data | 26.58 |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Tiger Lake-H (2021) |
| Release date | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) | 11 May 2021 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.13 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 12 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm SuperFin |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | PPGA478 | FCBGA1787 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2, Intel® AVX-512 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 51.2 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel® Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.45 GHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 16 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680x4320@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 May 2008 | 11 May 2021 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 6 |
| Threads | 1 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 35 Watt |
Celeron M 560 has 16.7% lower power consumption.
i5-11400H, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 13 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 550% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 560 and Core i5-11400H, 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.
