CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i5-13500 and Intel Core 7 240H are two Raptor Lake-based processors that end up nearly tied in overall average benchmark score, with the desktop i5-13500 posting 31510 and the mobile Core 7 240H posting 31483, a negligible 0.1% gap. The data shows a clear split in workload behavior: the i5-13500 dominates most multi-threaded and specialized workloads, winning 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Core 7 240H counters with a notable win in Cinebench R23 multi-core and a small lead in PassMark physics. These are different physical designs, one a 14-core desktop chip for Socket 1700 with a 65 W TDP, the other a 10-core mobile chip for BGA 1744 with a 45 W TDP, yet their aggregate performance sits within a rounding error of each other. The choice between them is less about raw capability and more about platform, power envelope, and which specific benchmark suite matters most to the user.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core i5-13500 is the stronger all-around performer for multi-threaded desktop workloads. Its wins in PassMark multi-thread (31285 vs 23975, a 30.5% advantage), integer math (108320 vs 80396, 34.7% ahead), and floating-point math (80198 vs 58905, 36.1% ahead) make it the clear pick for users who run heavily threaded applications like video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific computing. The i5-13500 also holds a decisive edge in data compression (391249 vs 271774, 44% ahead) and random string sorting (42759 vs 28866, 48.1% ahead), suggesting it handles database-style or file-archiving tasks with significantly more throughput.

The Intel Core 7 240H, despite its lower core count, wins Cinebench R23 multi-core (15764 vs 14573, a 7.6% lead) and PassMark physics (1723 vs 1645, 4.5% ahead). This makes it the better choice for certain rendering workloads that favor the newer Raptor Lake Refresh architecture tuning, and for physics simulations. However, its losses in almost every other multi-threaded test are substantial, often 30-40%, which limits its appeal to a narrow set of applications. The Core 7 240H is also the higher-end part in terms of launch MSRP at $502, while the i5-13500 launched at $242, though the i5-13500's desktop platform requires a separate motherboard and cooler. For users who need a mobile processor, the Core 7 240H is the only option of the two; for anyone building a desktop, the i5-13500 offers far better multi-threaded value based on benchmark results alone.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same Raptor Lake architecture and 10 nm process node from Intel, but they diverge in core configuration and physical design. The i5-13500 packs 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads. This 4-core, 4-thread gap is the primary driver behind the i5-13500's multi-threaded dominance in most tests. The i5-13500 features a larger die size of 215 mm², whereas the Core 7 240H's die size is not listed in the data. Cache layouts also differ: the i5-13500 has 1.25 MB of L2 per core, while the Core 7 240H has 2 MB of L2 per core, though both share 24 MB of L3 cache.

The Core 7 240H belongs to the Raptor Lake Refresh generation and has a higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz versus the i5-13500's 4.80 GHz, while both have a 2.50 GHz base clock. The i5-13500 supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 240H does not. The i5-13500 is a desktop part with Intel Socket 1700 and a 65 W TDP, whereas the Core 7 240H is a mobile part with Intel BGA 1744 and a 45 W TDP, reflecting its intended use in laptops. The i5-13500 offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 7 240H offers 8 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the i5-13500 has UHD Graphics 770, while the Core 7 240H carries Iris Xe Graphics 64EU.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-13500 wins decisively in almost every PassMark subtest, with margins ranging from 2.2% in single-thread to 48.1% in random string sorting. Its largest victories come in data-intensive and math-heavy workloads: data compression (44% ahead), data encryption (47.4% ahead), extended instructions (41.8% ahead), floating-point math (36.1% ahead), and integer math (34.7% ahead). It also wins Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core by 1.9% and 28.4% respectively, and single-core tests by 2.8% to 3.5% across R15, R20, and R23. The i5-13500's PassMark multi-thread score of 31285 versus the Core 7 240H's 23975 reinforces that it excels in broadly parallel workloads.

The Core 7 240H wins only two head-to-head tests, but both are meaningful. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15764 beats the i5-13500's 14573 by 7.6%, which is notable because R23 is a widely used rendering benchmark that often reflects real-world 3D rendering performance. Its PassMark physics score of 1723 edges out the i5-13500's 1645 by 4.5%, suggesting an advantage in physics simulation workloads. The Core 7 240H also has a higher boost clock (5.20 GHz vs 4.80 GHz) and more L2 cache per core (2 MB vs 1.25 MB), which may explain its R23 win despite having fewer cores. For users running Cinebench R23 or physics-heavy applications, the Core 7 240H is the better choice; for everything else in the benchmark suite, the i5-13500 leads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-13500 has an average benchmark score of 31510, while the Intel Core 7 240H has 31483, a difference of only 0.1% in favor of the i5-13500.

Q: Why does the Core 7 240H win Cinebench R23 multi-core despite having fewer cores?

A: The Core 7 240H scores 15764 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus the i5-13500's 14573, a 7.6% lead. This likely stems from its higher 5.20 GHz boost clock (versus 4.80 GHz) and larger 2 MB per-core L2 cache, which can benefit certain single-thread-sensitive portions of the workload.

Q: Which processor is better for data encryption tasks?

A: The i5-13500 is significantly better, scoring 22333 in PassMark data encryption versus the Core 7 240H's 15155, a 47.4% advantage.

Q: Are the two processors in the same performance tier overall?

A: Yes, both sit at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs and have nearly identical average benchmark scores (31510 vs 31483). Their nearest rivals are also the same set of processors, including the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H and AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX.

Q: Does the Core 7 240H have any advantage in single-threaded performance?

A: No, the i5-13500 wins all single-thread tests. It leads Cinebench R23 single-core by 3.5% (1780 vs 1719) and PassMark single-thread by 2.2% (3865 vs 3782).

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core i5-13500 supports ECC memory; the Core 7 240H does not list ECC support in its specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i5-13500's most dominant wins come in PassMark subtests. In random string sorting, it scores 42759 against the Core 7 240H's 28866, a 48.1% margin, the largest gap in the entire head-to-head set. Data encryption shows a 47.4% advantage (22333 vs 15155), and data compression follows at 44% (391249 vs 271774). Extended instructions also favor the i5-13500 by 41.8% (23956 vs 16897). These results paint a clear picture: for workloads involving sorting, encryption, compression, or SIMD-heavy code, the i5-13500 is roughly 40-48% faster.

In Cinebench, the results are mixed. The i5-13500 wins R15 multi-core by just 1.9% (2405 vs 2360) and R20 multi-core by a massive 28.4% (10990 vs 8562). However, the Core 7 240H flips the script in R23 multi-core, winning by 7.6% (15764 vs 14573). This discrepancy between R20 and R23 suggests the Core 7 240H's architecture performs better under R23's specific workload characteristics, possibly due to its higher boost clock and larger L2 cache. In single-core, the i5-13500 wins all three Cinebench versions: R15 by 2.8% (256 vs 249), R20 by 28.4% (1551 vs 1208), and R23 by 3.5% (1780 vs 1719). The R20 single-core margin is unusually large compared to the other tests.

PassMark multi-thread shows the i5-13500 ahead by 30.5% (31285 vs 23975), while PassMark physics is one of the Core 7 240H's two wins, at 1723 vs 1645 (4.5% ahead). The two processors tie exactly in PassMark find prime numbers at 102 each. Floating-point math and integer math both favor the i5-13500 by 36.1% (80198 vs 58905) and 34.7% (108320 vs 80396), respectively. Overall, the i5-13500 wins 15 of 17 tests, with the Core 7 240H taking only Cinebench R23 multi-core and PassMark physics.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The i5-13500 has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Core 7 240H has 10 cores and 16 threads. The i5-13500's boost clock is 4.80 GHz, whereas the Core 7 240H boosts to 5.20 GHz; both have a 2.50 GHz base clock. TDP differs significantly: the i5-13500 is rated at 65 W, while the Core 7 240H is rated at 45 W. The i5-13500 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core 7 240H uses Intel BGA 1744. The i5-13500's codename is Raptor Lake-S, and the Core 7 240H's is Raptor Lake-H, with the latter belonging to the Raptor Lake Refresh generation.

The i5-13500 has a die size of 215 mm², while the Core 7 240H's die size is not listed. L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB on the i5-13500 versus 2 MB on the Core 7 240H; both share 24 MB of L3 cache. The i5-13500 supports ECC memory, while the Core 7 240H does not. PCIe lanes differ: the i5-13500 offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 7 240H offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 on the i5-13500 and Iris Xe Graphics 64EU on the Core 7 240H. The market segment is Desktop for the i5-13500 and Mobile for the Core 7 240H. Release dates are 2023-01-03 for the i5-13500 and 2024-12-17 for the Core 7 240H. The launch MSRP is $242 for the i5-13500 and $502 for the Core 7 240H.