Intel Core 7 250H vs Intel Core i7-13800H Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors into distinct roles. The Intel Core 7 250H wins 11 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core i7-13800H takes 6. The overall average benchmark scores are close, with the Core 7 250H at 35728 and the i7-13800H at 34988, a difference of roughly 2%. Both sit near the 85th and 84th percentiles of all CPUs respectively, placing them in the same performance tier. However, the nature of their wins matters more than the count. The Core 7 250H dominates in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests, with a massive 70.1% lead in R15 multi-core. The i7-13800H counters in Cinebench R23, both multi-core and single-core, plus several PassMark math and physics workloads. For buyers, the Core 7 250H is the pick when sustained multi-threaded rendering in older Cinebench versions or integer-heavy work is the priority. The i7-13800H is the better choice for workloads that favor its R23 single-core strength, extended instruction throughput, and prime-number finding. Neither chip is a universal winner, and the recorded data shows a genuine split based on the specific application.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design. Each uses the Raptor Lake architecture and the Raptor Lake-H codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. Both have 14 cores and 20 threads, with identical base clocks of 2.50 GHz and the same 45 W TDP. The socket is Intel BGA 1744 for both, and each supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus. Cache configurations match exactly: 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. Integrated graphics are also identical, with Iris Xe Graphics featuring 96 execution units. PCIe support is the same, Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU only.

The meaningful differences appear in boost clocks, release timing, and die size. The Core 7 250H boosts to 5.40 GHz, which is 0.20 GHz higher than the i7-13800H's 5.20 GHz. That clock advantage helps explain its single-thread PassMark win. The i7-13800H launched earlier, on 2023-01-03, while the Core 7 250H arrived later on 2024-12-17. The i7-13800H's die size is recorded at 257 mm², while the Core 7 250H has no die size listed in the database. The generations differ as well: the Core 7 250H is listed as Core 7 (Raptor Lake Refresh), while the i7-13800H is Core i7 (Raptor Lake-H). Both are active production parts, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 250H is $502, and for the i7-13800H it is $457. The part numbers differ, SRQ6UQ5MK for the newer chip and SRMJ2 for the older one.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single gap in the entire comparison is in Cinebench R15 multi-core. The Core 7 250H scores 3147 against the i7-13800H's 1850, a 70.1% advantage. That is an enormous margin, far larger than the 25.8% lead in R20 multi-core, where the newer chip scores 9697 versus 7710. The R15 single-core test also favors the Core 7 250H, 298 to 261, a 14.2% delta. R20 single-core shows a similar pattern, with 1368 versus 1088, a 25.7% lead. These results indicate that the Core 7 250H's higher boost clock translates directly into older Cinebench versions, where it is clearly superior.

The i7-13800H flips the script in Cinebench R23. It scores 18358 in multi-core versus 16561 for the Core 7 250H, a 9.8% advantage. The single-core R23 gap is even larger, 2591 versus 1931, a 25.5% delta. This is a striking reversal, as the newer chip loses by a wide margin in the newest R23 test despite winning decisively in R15 and R20. The PassMark suite shows a more mixed picture. The Core 7 250H wins integer math decisively, 99100 versus 92589, a 7% lead. It also edges out in data compression (303269 vs 299179, 1.4%), data encryption (18206 vs 17726, 2.7%), multithread (27030 vs 26545, 1.8%), and random string sorting (34136 vs 33188, 2.9%). The single-thread PassMark test heavily favors the Core 7 250H, 4148 versus 3543, a 17.1% delta.

The i7-13800H takes the remaining PassMark tests. It wins extended instructions, 18011 versus 17318, a 3.8% margin. Prime number finding goes its way, 115 versus 106, a 7.8% lead. Floating-point math favors it slightly, 66579 versus 65094, a 2.2% delta. Physics also goes to the older chip, 1924 versus 1824, a 5.2% margin. Overall, the Core 7 250H wins 11 tests and the i7-13800H wins 6. The wins by the newer chip tend to be larger in magnitude, particularly the Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core results, while the older chip's wins in R23 are substantial but limited to that suite plus a few PassMark workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Intel Core i7-13800H boosts to 5.20 GHz. Both have the same 2.50 GHz base clock.

Q: Are the core and thread counts identical?

A: Yes, both processors feature 14 cores and 20 threads. They also share the same 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: Why does the Core 7 250H win Cinebench R15 but lose Cinebench R23?

A: The data shows a dramatic shift. The Core 7 250H leads by 70.1% in R15 multi-core and 25.8% in R20 multi-core, but the i7-13800H leads by 9.8% in R23 multi-core and 25.5% in R23 single-core. The newer chip dominates older render tests, while the older chip wins the most recent version.

Q: Which processor has better single-thread performance in PassMark?

A: The Core 7 250H scores 4148 in the PassMark single-thread test, which is 17.1% higher than the i7-13800H's 3543. This aligns with its higher boost clock.

Q: Do both processors use the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both feature Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. They also share the same memory support for DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus.

Q: What is the overall win count in the head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Core 7 250H wins 11 tests, while the i7-13800H wins 6 tests. The average benchmark scores are 35728 for the newer chip and 34988 for the older chip.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 250H is the clear choice for legacy Cinebench rendering workloads. Its 70.1% lead in R15 multi-core and 25.8% lead in R20 multi-core are the largest margins recorded in this comparison. The single-core R15 and R20 tests also favor it, with 14.2% and 25.7% deltas respectively. For PassMark integer math, the newer chip is 7% ahead, making it suitable for arithmetic-heavy applications. Data compression, encryption, and random string sorting all go its way by modest margins, from 1.4% to 2.9%. The multithread PassMark test also favors it, 27030 versus 26545. The 17.1% single-thread PassMark win reinforces its strength in lightly threaded tasks.

The i7-13800H claims its territory in the newest Cinebench version. The 9.8% multi-core lead and 25.5% single-core lead in R23 make it the better option for current rendering workloads that use that benchmark. In the PassMark suite, it wins extended instructions by 3.8%, prime number finding by 7.8%, floating-point math by 2.2%, and physics by 5.2%. These are all specialized workloads, but they cover important areas like scientific computation and physics simulation. The older chip also has a lower launch MSRP, recorded at $457 versus $502 for the newer part, though both are mobile processors with the same 45 W TDP.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the decision hinges on which benchmark generation matters most. If the workload relies on Cinebench R15 or R20, the Core 7 250H is the overwhelming winner. If it depends on R23 or specific PassMark math and physics tests, the i7-13800H holds the edge. The overall average scores are close enough that neither chip is a clear performance leader, but the specific test results show that each has a distinct area of dominance. The Core 7 250H's higher boost clock helps in single-threaded PassMark and older Cinebench tests, while the i7-13800H's R23 performance suggests better optimization in that particular benchmark. The recorded data does not support a blanket recommendation; it supports a workload-specific one.