AMD Ryzen 7 250 vs Intel Core i9-13900HK Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are decisively lopsided. The Intel Core i9-13900HK wins 13 of the 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 7 250 manages just two victories. The margin of Intel's dominance varies dramatically by workload, from a razor-thin 2.2% edge in random string sorting to a crushing 39.5% advantage in Passmark's physics test.

Starting with the biggest Intel wins, the Passmark physics benchmark shows the most severe gap. The i9-13900HK scores 1896 against the Ryzen 7 250's 1147, a 39.5% difference. This is a workload where the Intel chip's higher core count and thread count translate directly into a massive performance advantage. Similarly, the Passmark find prime numbers test favors Intel by 33.6%, with the i9-13900HK posting 110 versus the Ryzen 7 250's 73.

Floating point math is another Intel stronghold. The i9-13900HK scores 68020, which is 21.7% ahead of the Ryzen 7 250's 53285. In the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, Intel maintains its lead with 16025 points versus 14676, an 8.4% advantage. The Passmark multi-thread test shows Intel ahead by 11%, scoring 28194 against 25089. Data compression and encryption both favor Intel by 8.7% and 8%, respectively, with scores of 329454 versus 300708 and 19198 versus 17661.

Even in single-threaded performance, where AMD's Zen 4 architecture is typically competitive, Intel takes the lead. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows Intel at 1843.5 versus AMD's 1715, a 7% advantage. Passmark's single-thread test similarly favors Intel, with 3810 against 3678, a 3.5% gap. The Cinebench R15 multi-core test also goes to Intel, with 2398 versus 2302, a 4% margin. Integer math is close, with Intel ahead just 2.7% (94120 versus 91565), and random string sorting is the tightest contest at 2.2% (36662 versus 35861).

The AMD Ryzen 7 250's two wins are notable for their context. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD edges out Intel 269 to 263, a 2.3% advantage. The more significant AMD victory comes in Passmark's extended instructions test, where the Ryzen 7 250 scores 21613 against Intel's 19534, a 10.6% margin. This suggests the Zen 4 core handles certain advanced instruction sets with greater efficiency than Raptor Lake.

The Verdict

The data points clearly toward the Intel Core i9-13900HK as the superior performer for most demanding workloads. Its 39.5% lead in physics, 33.6% lead in prime number calculation, and 21.7% lead in floating point math indicate that users running scientific simulations, financial modeling, or other compute-heavy applications should choose Intel. The i9-13900HK also holds a strong position in multi-threaded rendering, with its 8.4% Cinebench R23 multi-core advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 7 250 is not without merit. Its 10.6% lead in extended instructions suggests it handles AVX-512 or similar workloads with greater efficiency. The 2.3% win in Cinebench R15 single-core, while narrow, demonstrates that the Zen 4 core is competitive in lightly threaded applications. Users whose primary workloads involve extended instruction sets or older single-threaded benchmarks may find the Ryzen 7 250 adequate.

However, the overall average benchmark score tells a different story. The Ryzen 7 250 achieves an average score of 38221, which actually places it slightly higher than the i9-13900HK's 37425, despite losing 13 of 15 direct comparisons. This paradox stems from the differing benchmark suites and the Ryzen 7 250's strong showing in the Passmark extended instructions test, which carries significant weight in the average. The i9-13900HK sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen 7 250 sits at the 86th percentile, making them statistically equivalent in overall standing.

For users who need raw multi-threaded throughput, the Intel chip is the clear choice. For users who prioritize specific instruction set efficiency or operate in constrained power envelopes, the Ryzen 7 250's lower TDP of 28 watts against Intel's 45 watts could be a deciding factor, though the benchmark data does not directly measure power efficiency.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 7 250 uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Hawk Point codename, built on TSMC's 4 nm process node with 25,000 million transistors across a 178 mm² die. The Intel Core i9-13900HK uses Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-H codename, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process with a larger 257 mm² die size.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Ryzen 7 250 employs 8 cores and 16 threads, a straightforward symmetric design. The i9-13900HK uses 14 cores and 20 threads, indicating Intel's hybrid architecture with performance and efficiency cores, though the database does not detail the exact core mix. This explains Intel's multi-threaded dominance despite its lower base clock of 2.60 GHz versus AMD's 3.30 GHz. The Intel chip boosts to 5.40 GHz, exceeding the Ryzen 7 250's 5.10 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Ryzen 7 250 provides 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The i9-13900HK offers 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger caches contribute to its performance in memory-sensitive workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. AMD pairs the Ryzen 7 250 with the Radeon 780M, while Intel uses the Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no direct comparison is possible.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals several distinct differences between the two processors. Core and thread counts differ significantly: 8 cores and 16 threads for AMD versus 14 cores and 20 threads for Intel. Base clocks vary with AMD at 3.30 GHz and Intel at 2.60 GHz, while boost clocks favor Intel at 5.40 GHz against AMD's 5.10 GHz.

Thermal design power shows a major gap: the Ryzen 7 250 draws 28 watts, while the i9-13900HK draws 45 watts. This 17-watt difference may influence laptop design and battery life, though the database does not measure power consumption directly.

Memory support differs, with the Ryzen 7 250 limited to DDR5 while the i9-13900HK supports both DDR4 and DDR5. AMD specifies a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel's memory bandwidth is not recorded. PCIe capabilities also differ: AMD provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while Intel provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes.

The Ryzen 7 250 uses AMD Socket FP8, while the i9-13900HK uses Intel BGA 1744. The Intel chip has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD chip does not, potentially enabling overclocking on supported platforms. The Intel processor carries a launch MSRP of $697, while the AMD chip has no recorded launch MSRP. The Ryzen 7 250 was released on January 5, 2025, roughly two years after the i9-13900HK's January 3, 2023 release date.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900HK is faster, scoring 16025 versus the AMD Ryzen 7 250's 14676, an 8.4% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 7 250 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, it wins two of 15 head-to-head tests: Cinebench R15 single-core by 2.3% (269 versus 263) and Passmark extended instructions by 10.6% (21613 versus 19534).

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Passmark physics, where the Intel Core i9-13900HK leads by 39.5%, scoring 1896 against the AMD chip's 1147.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has an average benchmark score of 38221, while the Intel Core i9-13900HK averages 37425, putting the AMD chip slightly ahead despite losing most direct comparisons.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Intel Core i9-13900HK has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 250 has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Intel Core i9-13900HK has a TDP of 45 watts, a 17-watt difference.