AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core i5-13600KF Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 and Intel Core i5-13600KF occupy the same overall performance percentile (86th), yet their benchmark profiles could not be more different. The Intel part wins every single head-to-head comparison in the data, but the margin of victory varies dramatically by workload. The Ryzen 7 250 is a mobile-focused, power-efficient Zen 4 part, while the i5-13600KF is a desktop Raptor Lake processor with more cores and a much higher thermal envelope. The data shows a consistent, decisive advantage for Intel in compute-heavy tasks, but the AMD chip’s positioning as a mobile processor means these results must be read with the platform context in mind.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the entire comparison is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core i5-13600KF scores 31,727 against the Ryzen 7 250’s 14,676. That is a 53.7% deficit for AMD, a massive gap that reflects the Intel part’s 14 cores and 20 threads versus the AMD’s 8 cores and 16 threads. The single-core R23 result tells a similar story: Intel scores 4,479 against 1,715, a 61.7% lead. That is the largest single-core margin in the data, indicating that Intel’s Raptor Lake architecture holds a significant per-thread advantage in this rendering workload.

Cinebench R15 shows the same pattern but with narrower margins. In multi-core, Intel wins 3,198 to 2,302, a 28% difference. In single-core, Intel leads 451 to 269, a 40.4% gap. The R15 numbers are less extreme than R23, which suggests the newer benchmark amplifies the architectural differences between the two chips. The Ryzen 7 250’s 5.10 GHz boost clock matches the Intel’s 5.10 GHz, but the Intel part’s higher base clock of 3.50 GHz (versus 3.30 GHz) and its larger cache hierarchy contribute to its per-core superiority.

PassMark’s integer math test shows the smallest multi-core gap: Intel scores 122,169 against 91,565, a 25.1% lead. Extended instructions produce the same 25.1% margin, with Intel at 28,865 and AMD at 21,613. These are the closest multi-threaded results, suggesting that in certain ALU-heavy workloads, the Ryzen 7 250’s Zen 4 cores are relatively more competitive. However, the floating-point math test tells a different story: Intel scores 90,424 against 53,285, a 41.1% lead. The physics test is even more one-sided, with Intel at 2,226 versus 1,147, a 48.5% gap.

Data compression and encryption tasks also favor Intel heavily. In data compression, Intel scores 475,505 against 300,708, a 36.8% margin. In encryption, Intel leads 26,957 to 17,661, a 34.5% gap. Prime number finding is another strong Intel result: 152 versus 73, a 52% difference. Random string sorting shows Intel at 50,851 against 35,861, a 29.5% lead. Multi-threaded PassMark overall has Intel at 37,488 versus 25,089, a 33.1% margin.

The only test where the two chips are close is PassMark single-thread, where Intel scores 4,118 against AMD’s 3,678, a modest 10.7% lead. This is the smallest delta in the entire dataset, and it indicates that for lightly threaded tasks, the Ryzen 7 250 is a credible competitor. The data shows 15 wins for Intel and 0 for AMD across all head-to-head comparisons, but the single-thread result is the one area where AMD is within striking distance.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-13600KF is the faster processor in every measured benchmark. For users who need maximum multi-threaded performance, the i5-13600KF’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31,727 is more than double the Ryzen 7 250’s 14,676. That 53.7% advantage makes the Intel part the clear choice for rendering, video encoding, or any workload that scales across cores. The i5-13600KF also holds a 61.7% lead in single-core R23, meaning even lightly threaded applications will run noticeably faster on the Intel chip.

However, the platform context matters. The Ryzen 7 250 is a mobile processor with a 28 W TDP, while the i5-13600KF is a desktop part with a 125 W TDP. The AMD chip’s integrated Radeon 780M graphics provide a built-in display solution, whereas the Intel part has no integrated graphics. The Ryzen 7 250 targets thin-and-light laptops, while the i5-13600KF is designed for desktop builds with a discrete GPU. A user comparing these two parts is likely deciding between a mobile platform and a desktop platform, not just between two CPUs.

For a desktop user building a performance system, the i5-13600KF is the obvious choice. Its 14 cores, 20 threads, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache deliver consistently superior results across Cinebench, PassMark, and every other workload in the data. The Intel part also supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the AMD chip only supports DDR5, giving the Intel platform more flexibility. The Intel part’s multiplier is unlocked, allowing for overclocking, whereas the Ryzen 7 250 is locked.

For a mobile user, the Ryzen 7 250 is the only viable option in this comparison, as the i5-13600KF is a desktop part. The AMD chip’s 28 W TDP and integrated graphics make it suitable for laptops, and its 86th percentile ranking shows it is a capable mobile processor. The 10.7% single-thread deficit is the closest result, so everyday tasks like web browsing or office work will feel comparable. But for sustained multi-core workloads, the mobile AMD part cannot match the desktop Intel part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-13600KF wins decisively with a score of 31,727, which is 53.7% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 250’s 14,676.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the AMD Ryzen 7 250 is competitive?

A: The closest result is PassMark single-thread, where the Ryzen 7 250 scores 3,678 against the Intel’s 4,118, a 10.7% gap. This is the smallest margin in the entire head-to-head dataset.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel Core i5-13600KF has a TDP of 125 W.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports only DDR5, while the Intel Core i5-13600KF supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 includes Radeon 780M integrated graphics. The Intel Core i5-13600KF has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for both processors?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and the Intel Core i5-13600KF rank in the 86th percentile against all CPUs.

Specification Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i5-13600KF has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Intel part’s base clock is 3.50 GHz versus the AMD’s 3.30 GHz, though both boost to 5.10 GHz. The AMD chip has a TDP of 28 W, while the Intel chip has a TDP of 125 W. The socket types differ: AMD uses Socket FP8, while Intel uses Socket 1700. The AMD part is a mobile processor, while the Intel part is a desktop processor.

The memory support differs significantly. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports DDR5 only, while the Intel Core i5-13600KF supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The AMD chip has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel part has no listed memory bandwidth. The AMD chip does not support ECC memory, but the Intel chip does. The PCIe lanes also differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Cache configuration varies as well. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-13600KF has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD part has integrated Radeon 780M graphics, while the Intel part has none. The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD part is locked. The Intel part’s process node is 10 nm, while the AMD part uses a 4 nm node from TSMC.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is built on Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It contains 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-13600KF uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-S codename, manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel, with a die size of 257 mm². These process differences are substantial: the 4 nm node allows AMD to pack more transistors into a smaller area, but the Intel part’s larger die accommodates more cores and more cache.

The core configurations reflect different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses 8 homogeneous Zen 4 cores, each with 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 cache, sharing 16 MB of L3. The Intel Core i5-13600KF uses 14 cores (a combination of performance and efficiency cores), with 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core, sharing 24 MB of L3. The Intel part’s larger L3 cache is a key factor in its benchmark dominance, particularly in multi-threaded workloads.

The memory controllers also differ. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 supports only DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, and its 89.6 GB/s bandwidth is explicitly listed. The Intel Core i5-13600KF supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, but its memory bandwidth is not listed in the data. The AMD part’s integrated Radeon 780M graphics is a significant architectural feature, as it eliminates the need for a discrete GPU in mobile systems. The Intel part has no integrated graphics, meaning it requires a separate graphics card.

The PCIe implementation differs as well. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Intel Core i5-13600KF provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The Intel part’s Gen 5 support offers higher bandwidth for compatible devices, though the AMD part has more lanes. The production status for both is active, but the Intel part was released on 2022-09-26, while the AMD part was released on 2025-01-05. The Intel part’s launch MSRP is $294, while the AMD part has no listed MSRP. These architectural differences explain the benchmark results: the Intel part’s higher core count, larger cache, and higher TDP allow it to outperform the AMD part in virtually every workload, while the AMD part’s smaller process node and integrated graphics make it suitable for power-constrained mobile platforms.