Intel Core 7 250H vs Intel Core i7-13700HX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark record between these two mobile processors is lopsided, but not in the way the product names might suggest. The Intel Core i7-13700HX takes 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 7 250H manages only 4 wins. That split reveals a clear story: the older HX part dominates multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads, while the newer 250H counters with single-core speed.

The most decisive victories for the i7-13700HX come in Cinebench. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i7 posts 20479 against the 250H's 16561, a 19.1% advantage. The gap widens further in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i7 scores 11290 versus 9697, a 14.1% lead. Even in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7 stays ahead at 3277 versus 3147, a smaller but still meaningful 4% margin. These results indicate that sustained all-core workloads, such as video rendering or compilation, will favor the i7-13700HX by a substantial margin.

PassMark tests reinforce the same pattern. Data compression shows the i7 at 392725 versus 303269, a 22.8% gap. Floating point math goes to the i7 at 85863 versus 65094, a 24.2% difference. Extended instructions favor the i7 by 28.2% (24127 versus 17318). Integer math, multithread, random string sorting, data encryption, and find prime numbers all go to the i7 with margins ranging from 14.5% to 18.7%. The i7 also wins PassMark physics at 1908 versus 1824, a modest 4.4% edge.

The Core 7 250H's wins are concentrated in single-thread tests, where it shows genuine strength. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the 250H scores 298 versus 272, a 9.6% win. Cinebench R23 single-core goes to the 250H at 1931 versus 1875, a 3% margin. PassMark single-thread shows the 250H at 4148 versus 3819, an 8.6% advantage. Notably, the 250H loses Cinebench R20 single-core, scoring 1368 versus the i7's 1593, a 14.1% deficit. That single anomaly aside, the single-core picture favors the newer chip.

Looking at the aggregate scores, the Core 7 250H holds an average benchmark score of 35728, placing it at the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The i7-13700HX averages 34554, sitting at the 84th percentile. Those overall numbers are close, but the distribution of wins tells the real story. The i7's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X at 35909 (0.5% ahead) and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 at 35802 (0.2% ahead), while the 250H sits near the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 at 35719 (within rounding) and the Intel Core Ultra 9 185H at 35670 (0.2% behind). Both chips are competitive with that peer group, but they achieve it through very different workload profiles.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700HX. In Cinebench R23 multi-core it scores 20479 versus 16561, a 19.1% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 14.1% lead at 11290 versus 9697.

Q: Does the Core 7 250H win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, four tests. It wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 9.6%, Cinebench R23 single-core by 3%, and PassMark single-thread by 8.6% (4148 versus 3819). It also wins the duplicate PassMark singlethread result by the same margin.

Q: How do the two chips compare in PassMark multithread?

A: The i7-13700HX scores 32637 versus the 250H's 27030, a 17.2% advantage. That is a consistent multi-thread gap across most PassMark compute tests.

Q: What is the launch MSRP difference?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H has a launch MSRP of $502. The Intel Core i7-13700HX has a launch MSRP of $485.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 250H boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the i7-13700HX boosts to 5.00 GHz. The 250H also has a higher base clock at 2.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz.

Q: Does the i7-13700HX support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the i7-13700HX has ECC memory support enabled. The Core 7 250H does not support ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-13700HX is the clear choice for sustained, heavily threaded workloads. Its wins in Cinebench R20 and R23 multi-core, PassMark multithread, data compression, encryption, floating point, integer math, extended instructions, and random string sorting all point to one conclusion: if the task can use all available cores, the i7 will finish faster. The margins range from 4% in Cinebench R15 multi-core to 28.2% in PassMark extended instructions. For video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific computing, or any batch processing job, the i7-13700HX holds a decisive edge.

The Core 7 250H wins where responsiveness and lightly threaded performance matter. Its single-core victories in Cinebench R15 (9.6%), Cinebench R23 (3%), and PassMark single-thread (8.6%) indicate snappier everyday application behavior. For tasks that rely on a few fast cores, such as web browsing, office work, or older games that do not scale across many threads, the 250H will feel more immediate. The 250H also loses by only 4.4% in PassMark physics, so even in some multi-thread tests it stays competitive.

The i7-13700HX also wins PassMark find prime numbers by 14.5%, which reflects its advantage in integer-heavy algorithmic workloads. The 250H's single-thread wins are consistent but narrower in magnitude compared to the i7's multi-thread dominance. If forced to choose based purely on benchmark breadth, the i7-13700HX wins more tests and wins them by larger margins.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on core counts, clock speeds, power limits, and platform features. The i7-13700HX has 16 cores and 24 threads, while the 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads. That extra core and thread count explains much of the i7's multi-thread advantage.

Clock speeds favor the 250H. Its base clock is 2.50 GHz and boost clock is 5.40 GHz, versus the i7's 2.10 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The 250H's higher clocks contribute to its single-thread wins despite having fewer total cores.

Thermal design power differs significantly. The i7-13700HX has a 55W TDP, while the 250H has a 45W TDP. This means the i7 is rated for more sustained power draw, which supports its multi-thread performance but also demands more from the laptop cooling solution.

The socket and platform differ as well. The 250H uses Intel BGA 1744, while the i7 uses Intel BGA 1964. These are not interchangeable sockets. The i7 also offers Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes (CPU only), whereas the 250H provides Gen 5 PCIe with just 8 lanes (CPU only). That is a substantial difference for users who need high-bandwidth connectivity to GPUs or storage.

Memory support is the same in type (DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel), but the i7 adds ECC memory support while the 250H does not. The i7 also has an unlocked multiplier, meaning it can be overclocked if the laptop BIOS permits. The 250H's multiplier is locked.

The integrated graphics differ: the 250H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the i7 uses UHD Graphics 770. The 250H's iGPU likely offers stronger graphics performance, though no direct benchmark comparisons are recorded in this data.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, but they represent different variants. The 250H is part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation, specifically the Raptor Lake-H series. The i7-13700HX belongs to the 13th Gen Core series, using the Raptor Lake-HX variant. Both are manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process node and are produced by Intel's own foundry.

The die size differs: the i7-13700HX has a die size of 257 mm², while no die size is recorded for the 250H. The larger die on the i7 aligns with its higher core count. Cache configurations also differ. Both chips have 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, but the L3 cache is larger on the i7 at 30 MB shared versus 24 MB shared on the 250H. That 6 MB L3 difference gives the i7 more headroom for cache-sensitive workloads.

The release dates set them apart by nearly two years. The i7-13700HX launched on 2023-01-03, while the 250H arrived on 2024-12-17. The 250H's newer position in the refresh generation explains its higher clock speeds but not its lower core count. Both are active production parts.

The i7's HX designation traditionally signals a higher-performance mobile variant with more cores and higher power limits. The 250H, despite its newer generation, carries fewer cores and a lower TDP. This creates an unusual situation where the older part is the more powerful multi-threaded processor, and the newer part is the more efficient single-threaded one.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward decision based on workload. The Intel Core i7-13700HX is the stronger processor for multi-threaded performance, winning 13 of 17 benchmark comparisons and taking large leads in Cinebench multi-core and PassMark compute tests. Its 16 cores, 24 threads, 30 MB L3 cache, and 55W TDP all support that role. Users who run rendering, encoding, compilation, or data-heavy tasks should pick the i7 without hesitation.

The Intel Core 7 250H wins the single-thread category. Its higher base and boost clocks (2.50 GHz and 5.40 GHz) deliver clear wins in Cinebench R15 single-core (9.6%), Cinebench R23 single-core (3%), and PassMark single-thread (8.6%). Its 45W TDP also suggests lower power draw, which can benefit thin-and-light laptops where cooling is limited. For daily use, office work, or applications that rely on a few fast cores, the 250H is the better fit.

The aggregate benchmark scores are close: 35728 for the 250H versus 34554 for the i7, with percentile rankings of 85 versus 84. That near-parity masks the workload split. The i7's wider wins in multi-thread tests outweigh the 250H's narrower single-thread wins in terms of raw workload coverage. The i7 also offers ECC memory support, an unlocked multiplier, and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, making it the more flexible platform for advanced users.

The 250H counters with a newer release date, a smaller TDP, and a stronger integrated GPU (Iris Xe 96EU versus UHD 770). For a laptop buyer who prioritizes battery life, lighter thermals, and snappy single-core response, the 250H is the sensible pick. For a buyer who needs maximum throughput in multi-threaded tasks, the i7-13700HX is the clear winner. The data does not support a universal recommendation; it supports two distinct use cases.