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

The Intel Core 7 250H and Intel Core i7-13700T are both Raptor Lake parts, but they target entirely different segments: one is a 45W mobile processor for laptops, the other a 35W desktop chip for compact or low-power systems. The benchmark data reveals a clear split: the desktop i7-13700T wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the mobile Core 7 250H takes only 4. However, the margins and the nature of those wins tell a more nuanced story than the raw tally suggests. Both chips land at the 85th percentile among all CPUs, with average benchmark scores of 35728 for the 250H and 35403 for the 13700T, making them statistically near-identical in overall performance despite their different form factors.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 250H carves out its victories in specific, narrow workloads rather than broad application classes. Its most decisive win comes in PassMark’s single-thread test, where it scores 4148 against the 13700T’s 3821, an 8.6% advantage. This is a genuine stronghold: the mobile chip also leads in PassMark physics (1824 vs 1769, a 3.1% edge), which often reflects per-thread efficiency in simulation-style tasks. The 250H’s other two wins are in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it posts 3147 versus 2343, a massive 34.3% lead, and it edges out the desktop part in that same test’s single-core run? No, that goes to the 13700T. The 250H’s R15 multi-core win is notable because it is its only multi-threaded victory, and it is by far the largest margin in either direction across all tested workloads.

The Intel Core i7-13700T dominates everywhere else, but its wins are most pronounced in sustained multi-threaded rendering. The biggest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the 13700T scores 23248 against the 250H’s 16561, a 28.8% advantage. It also leads in Cinebench R23 single-core by an even larger percentage (3282 vs 1931, a 41.2% gap), which is surprising given the 250H’s PassMark single-thread win. The desktop chip’s other multi-threaded leads include PassMark integer math (105397 vs 99100, 6% ahead), floating-point math (73928 vs 65094, 11.9% ahead), and multithread (28211 vs 27030, 4.2% ahead). In data compression and encryption, the 13700T is ahead by 7.5% and 5.3%, respectively. The pattern is clear: the 250H wins on lightweight single-thread responsiveness and one legacy Cinebench test, while the 13700T wins on almost every modern rendering, math, and data-processing workload.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental Raptor Lake architecture and are built on Intel’s 10 nm process node. The similarities end there. The Core i7-13700T is a desktop part (Raptor Lake-S) with 16 cores and 24 threads, while the Core 7 250H is a mobile part (Raptor Lake-H, part of the Raptor Lake Refresh generation) with 14 cores and 20 threads. That difference in core count is the primary driver of the 13700T’s multi-threaded superiority in most tests. The desktop chip also has a larger L3 cache: 30 MB shared versus 24 MB shared on the mobile chip. Both have the same per-core L1 (80 KB) and L2 (2 MB) caches.

Clock speeds reverse the core-count advantage. The 250H has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the 13700T operates at a 1.40 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost. The mobile chip’s higher boost clock explains its PassMark single-thread win, but the desktop part’s higher sustained multi-core output in Cinebench suggests that the 13700T’s larger core pool and 30 MB L3 cache overcome its lower clock ceiling in heavily threaded workloads. The 13700T also has a larger die size (257 mm²), whereas the 250H’s die size is not listed. Both chips support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, and neither supports ECC. PCIe connectivity differs: the 13700T offers Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while the 250H provides Gen 5 with only 8 lanes, reflecting its mobile positioning. Integrated graphics also differ, with the 250H using Iris Xe Graphics 96EU and the 13700T using UHD Graphics 770.

The 13700T is an unlocked multiplier (multiplierUnlocked: true), whereas the 250H is locked. The desktop chip sits in Socket 1700, while the mobile part uses BGA 1744. The 250H was released later (2024-12-17) compared to the 13700T (2023-01-03), and its launch MSRP is $502, while the 13700T launched at $384.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single margin in the entire comparison belongs to the 250H in Cinebench R15 multi-core. Its score of 3147 demolishes the 13700T’s 2343, a 34.3% delta. This is an anomaly relative to the rest of the data, as the 13700T wins the newer Cinebench R20 and R23 multi-core tests. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the 13700T scores 9764 versus 9697 for the 250H, a narrow 0.7% win. The gap widens dramatically in R23, where the 13700T’s 23248 versus 16561 yields a 28.8% margin.

Single-core performance is where the two chips diverge most confusingly. The 250H wins PassMark single-thread (4148 vs 3821, 8.6% ahead) and also wins PassMark singlethread (same scores, same 8.6% delta). Yet in Cinebench R23 single-core, the 13700T scores 3282 versus 1931 for the 250H, a 41.2% blowout. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R15 single-core (330 vs 298, 9.7% for the 13700T) and R20 single-core (1378 vs 1368, 0.7% for the 13700T). The 250H’s PassMark single-thread win suggests its 5.40 GHz boost clock is effective in that specific benchmark, but the 13700T’s massive Cinebench R23 lead indicates that its architecture sustains higher single-core performance under that workload’s stress.

In math-heavy PassMark tests, the 13700T is consistently ahead. It wins integer math by 6% (105397 vs 99100), floating-point math by 11.9% (73928 vs 65094), and extended instructions by 10.3% (19306 vs 17318). The 13700T also wins data compression (327700 vs 303269, 7.5% ahead) and data encryption (19230 vs 18206, 5.3% ahead). The 250H’s only other win is PassMark physics (1824 vs 1769, 3.1% ahead). The 13700T wins random string sorting by a slim 2.3% margin (34939 vs 34136) and find prime numbers by 16.5% (127 vs 106). In the aggregate PassMark multithread test, the 13700T leads 28211 to 27030, a 4.2% edge.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700T has 16 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Why does the Core 7 250H win PassMark single-thread but lose Cinebench R23 single-core by a huge margin?

A: The 250H scores 4148 in PassMark single-thread versus 3821 for the 13700T, an 8.6% win. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the 13700T scores 3282 versus 1931 for the 250H, a 41.2% lead. The data shows the 250H’s 5.40 GHz boost clock helps in PassMark, but the 13700T’s architecture is far stronger in the Cinebench R23 workload.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two chips?

A: The largest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core i7-13700T leads by 41.2%. The second-largest is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Intel Core 7 250H leads by 34.3%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H has an average benchmark score of 35728, while the Intel Core i7-13700T scores 35403. Both are at the 85th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode, and neither supports ECC memory.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, compared to 4.90 GHz for the Intel Core i7-13700T.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward choice for most users: the Intel Core i7-13700T is the stronger processor overall. It wins 13 of 17 benchmarks, including every modern Cinebench test, all major PassMark math and data workloads, and the aggregate multithread score. Its 28.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 41.2% lead in R23 single-core are decisive for rendering, compilation, and general productivity. The 13700T’s 16 cores, 24 threads, and 30 MB L3 cache give it a structural advantage that the 250H cannot overcome except in isolated cases.

The Intel Core 7 250H is not without merit. Its 34.3% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core is remarkable, and its 8.6% lead in PassMark single-thread shows that its 5.40 GHz boost clock delivers real responsiveness in lightweight tasks. It also wins PassMark physics by 3.1%. For users who prioritize single-threaded snappiness in specific applications, the 250H is competitive. However, its 14 cores and 24 MB L3 cache limit its multi-threaded ceiling, and its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1931 is a stark outlier that suggests inconsistency across workloads.

The verdict from the data is clear: pick the Intel Core i7-13700T if you need sustained multi-threaded performance, modern rendering capability, or broad workload coverage. Pick the Intel Core 7 250H only if you specifically value its PassMark single-thread performance, its physics score, or its legacy Cinebench R15 multi-core showing, and you are operating in a mobile form factor where the 13700T cannot be installed. The 13700T’s higher core count, larger cache, and dominance in the newest benchmark versions make it the superior choice for nearly all compute-heavy tasks.