Intel Core 7 240H vs Intel Core i7-13700TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results paint a clear picture of two very different CPU personalities. The Intel Core 7 240H wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i7-13700TE takes five. But the margins tell the real story.

The 240H’s biggest victory comes in Cinebench R15 multicore, where it scores 2360 against the 13700TE’s 1884 — a commanding 25.3% lead. That pattern repeats in PassMark physics, where the 240H posts 1723 versus 1368, a 26% advantage. These are substantial, workload-relevant wins. The mobile chip also dominates in extended instructions (16897 vs 13750, +22.9%) and data compression (271774 vs 243565, +11.6%).

The 240H also wins the single-threaded PassMark contest decisively, scoring 3782 against 3422 — a 10.5% lead. That result is echoed in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 240H leads 1208 to 1108 (+9%). The mobile part’s boost clock advantage clearly shows up here.

However, the 13700TE strikes back hard in the newer Cinebench workloads. In R23 multicore, the desktop chip scores 18698 versus 15764 — a 15.7% reversal. The R23 single-core gap is even more dramatic: 2639 versus 1719, a 34.9% blowout in favor of the 13700TE. That is the single largest delta in the entire comparison.

The 13700TE also wins the heavy math workloads. It leads in integer math (97911 vs 80396, +17.9%) and floating-point math (66421 vs 58905, +11.3%). The desktop chip’s extra cores and larger cache pay off where raw throughput matters.

The remaining wins for the 240H are narrower but consistent: data encryption (+1%), find prime numbers (+1%), multithread (+5.4%), and random string sorting (+5.7%). The 240H also edges out the 13700TE in Cinebench R20 multicore (8562 vs 7853, +9%).

Notably, the 13700TE wins Cinebench R15 single-core (265 vs 249, +6%), but that is its only single-thread victory. The overall pattern is clear: the 240H leads in most short-burst and mixed workloads, while the 13700TE dominates in sustained heavy compute and in the newest Cinebench versions.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H boosts to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-13700TE boosts to 4.80 GHz. That 0.4 GHz gap likely explains the 240H’s wins in PassMark single-thread (3782 vs 3422) and Cinebench R20 single-core (1208 vs 1108).

Q: Why does the 13700TE win Cinebench R23 multicore by so much?

A: The 13700TE has 16 cores and 24 threads versus the 240H’s 10 cores and 16 threads. It also carries a larger 30 MB shared L3 cache versus 24 MB. The result is an 18698 score against 15764, a 15.7% advantage.

Q: Which chip is better for data compression work?

A: The 240H wins decisively, scoring 271774 in PassMark data compression against the 13700TE’s 243565 — an 11.6% lead. The 240H also wins random string sorting (28866 vs 27307, +5.7%).

Q: Are these chips in the same performance tier overall?

A: Yes. Both sit at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs. The 240H’s average benchmark score is 31483, while the 13700TE scores 31028. The 240H’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX (31495, 0% delta) and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H (31508, -0.1%). The 13700TE’s nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS (31074, -0.1%).

Q: What about the integrated graphics?

A: The 240H comes with Iris Xe Graphics 64EU, while the 13700TE has UHD Graphics 770. Neither is designed for serious gaming, but the 240H’s iGPU is the more modern mobile solution.

Q: Which chip has the higher base clock?

A: The 240H has a 2.50 GHz base clock. The 13700TE lists a base clock of 1100.00 MHz, which is an unusually low figure — likely an efficiency-oriented setting given its 35W TDP. The 240H’s TDP is 45W.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 240H is the pick for responsiveness and mixed workloads. Its PassMark multithread score of 23975 versus 22754 (+5.4%) shows it handles parallel tasks well despite fewer cores. The 26% lead in physics simulation (1723 vs 1368) makes it the better choice for any physics-based application or game logic. The 22.9% advantage in extended instructions suggests the 240H is better optimized for SIMD and multimedia workloads.

The 240H also wins where latency and quick bursts matter. Its 10.5% single-thread PassMark lead and 9% Cinebench R20 single-core win indicate snappier everyday performance. Data compression, encryption, and sorting tasks all favor the mobile chip. If you are doing database work, file archival, or any mixed productivity, the 240H delivers better results in most sub-tests.

The Intel Core i7-13700TE is the heavy-lift champion. Its 15.7% Cinebench R23 multicore win and 17.9% integer math lead make it the better choice for long-running render jobs and compute-heavy workloads. The 11.3% floating-point advantage reinforces that. If your workload is sustained, multi-threaded, and math-intensive — think 3D rendering, scientific computing, or video encoding — the 13700TE’s 16 cores and 24 threads will outlast the 240H’s 10 cores.

The 13700TE also wins the newest Cinebench single-core test by a massive 34.9% (2639 vs 1719). That suggests that in the latest benchmark revisions, the 13700TE’s architecture extracts more performance per clock. The desktop chip’s larger 30 MB L3 cache likely helps in workloads that repeatedly access large datasets.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs diverge sharply on paper. The 240H is a mobile part with 10 cores and 16 threads, while the 13700TE is a desktop chip with 16 cores and 24 threads. Base clocks differ wildly: 2.50 GHz for the 240H versus 1100.00 MHz for the 13700TE. Boost clocks favor the 240H at 5.20 GHz against 4.80 GHz.

TDP is another major split. The 240H draws 45W, while the 13700TE is rated at 35W — a lower figure that suggests the desktop chip is tuned for efficiency despite its higher core count. The sockets are incompatible: the 240H uses Intel BGA 1744 (soldered to the board), while the 13700TE uses Intel Socket 1700.

Cache differences matter. Both share 80 KB L1 per core and 2 MB L2 per core, but the 13700TE has 30 MB of shared L3 versus 24 MB on the 240H. The 13700TE also has a larger die at 257 mm², while the 240H’s die size is not listed.

PCIe lanes differ substantially. The 13700TE offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the 240H provides Gen 5 with just 8 lanes. Memory support is identical (DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel), and neither supports ECC. The 240H features Iris Xe Graphics 64EU, while the 13700TE uses UHD Graphics 770. The 240H was released on 2024-12-17 with a launch MSRP of $502; the 13700TE launched on 2023-01-03 with no MSRP listed. Both are active production parts and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on Intel’s Raptor Lake architecture at the 10 nm node, but they belong to different variants. The 240H is Raptor Lake-H, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, and targets mobile systems. The 13700TE is Raptor Lake-S, from the original Raptor Lake generation, and targets desktop systems.

The core count difference is the defining architectural split. The 13700TE packs 16 cores and 24 threads, likely using a hybrid arrangement of performance and efficiency cores — a common Raptor Lake-S design. The 240H’s 10 cores and 16 threads suggest a smaller hybrid configuration, typical of Raptor Lake-H mobile parts.

The 13700TE’s larger 30 MB shared L3 cache gives it a structural advantage for cache-sensitive workloads. The 240H compensates with a higher boost clock (5.20 GHz versus 4.80 GHz) and a more aggressive 45W TDP envelope versus the 13700TE’s 35W. The 13700TE’s 257 mm² die size indicates a physically larger chip, while the 240H’s die dimensions are not disclosed.

The integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe Graphics 64EU on the 240H versus UHD Graphics 770 on the 13700TE. Both are Intel designs, but the mobile part’s iGPU is positioned for portability, while the desktop part pairs with discrete GPUs more commonly. The 13700TE’s 20-lane Gen 5 PCIe support is a clear architectural advantage for desktop expansion, while the 240H’s 8 lanes reflect mobile constraints.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case. Choose the Intel Core 7 240H if you prioritize responsiveness, mixed productivity, and single-thread speed. It wins 12 of 17 benchmark comparisons, including the crucial PassMark multithread (23975 vs 22754) and single-thread (3782 vs 3422) tests. Its 5.20 GHz boost clock and 45W TDP make it the stronger all-rounder for everyday workloads. The 82nd percentile ranking and average score of 31483 put it in the same league as the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX and Intel Core Ultra 5 225H.

Choose the Intel Core i7-13700TE if your work demands sustained multi-core throughput. Its 16 cores and 24 threads deliver a 15.7% Cinebench R23 multicore win and a 17.9% lead in integer math. The massive 34.9% single-core R23 advantage (2639 vs 1719) is puzzling but undeniable. The 35W TDP makes it an efficiency-focused desktop option, and the 30 MB L3 cache helps in large-dataset workloads. Its average score of 31028 is close to the 240H’s 31483, but the distribution of wins favors the 13700TE for heavy compute.

The 240H is the better general-purpose processor. The 13700TE is the better dedicated workhorse. If you value faster completion of long render or compute jobs, the 13700TE’s core advantage wins out. If you want a snappier, more versatile chip that handles most tasks better, the 240H is the data-backed choice. Both sit at the 82nd percentile, so neither is a bad pick — but they excel in different arenas.