Intel Core i5-12500H vs Intel Core i5-13500H Comparison

The Intel Core i5-12500H and Intel Core i5-13500H are near-identical in overall average benchmark scores, but the data reveals a stark split in workload behavior. The 12500H holds a 0.7% edge in average benchmark score (22625 vs 22468), yet the 13500H wins 13 of 23 head-to-head tests. This is not a simple generational upgrade; it is a trade-off between raw single-core consistency and multi-threaded burst performance.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in Cinebench results. The Intel Core i5-12500H dominates the Cinebench R23 suite, scoring 19840 in multicore against the 13500H’s 14081 — a massive 40.9% advantage. The single-core gap is even larger: 2801 vs 1775, a 57.8% delta in favor of the 12500H. These are the largest margins in the entire comparison, and they flip the expected narrative of a newer chip being faster.

The 13500H counters in Cinebench R15, where it scores 2304 in multicore versus 1999 for the 12500H (a 13.2% lead). However, the 12500H wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 13.3% (282 vs 249). The 12500H also takes Cinebench R20 multicore by 11.6% (8332 vs 7464) and single-core by 11.7% (1176 vs 1053). So within the same vendor’s suite, the 12500H wins four of six tests, and the 13500H wins only the R15 multicore iteration.

Outside Cinebench, the 13500H establishes a consistent but modest lead in 3DMark tests. It wins all six 3DMark benchmarks, with the largest edge in 4-thread performance (3385 vs 3139, a 7.3% delta). The 2-thread test shows a 6% lead (1887 vs 1773), while 8-thread (4550 vs 4394, 3.4%), single-thread (967 vs 924, 4.4%), 16-thread (6099 vs 5954, 2.4%), and max-thread (6160 vs 6043, 1.9%) deltas follow in descending order.

PassMark results split nearly evenly. The 13500H wins data compression (254661 vs 253431, 0.5%), data encryption (14938 vs 14749, 1.3%), find prime numbers (74 vs 57, 23%), integer math (72724 vs 71714, 1.4%), multithread (21366 vs 20625, 3.5%), and physics (1289 vs 1018, 21%). The 12500H wins extended instructions (14965 vs 14872, 0.6%), floating point math (52227 vs 52123, 0.2%), random string sorting (28099 vs 27955, 0.5%), and both single-thread entries (3418 vs 3397, 0.6%).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12500H is the clear choice for sustained multi-core rendering workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 19840 is 40.9% ahead of the 13500H, and the R20 multicore margin sits at 11.6%. For users running long-duration CPU renders or batch processing, the 12500H’s advantage in these specific tests is decisive. It also wins in floating-point math (52227 vs 52123) and extended instruction workloads (14965 vs 14872), suggesting an edge in scientific or numerically intensive tasks.

The Intel Core i5-13500H excels in short-burst and latency-sensitive operations. Its 3DMark sweep — particularly the 7.3% lead in 4-thread and 6% lead in 2-thread tests — points to stronger responsiveness in lightly threaded applications. The PassMark physics test shows a 21% advantage (1289 vs 1018), which often correlates with gaming or simulation physics. Data compression and encryption also favor the 13500H by 0.5% and 1.3%, respectively, making it marginally better for file archiving or encrypted storage workloads.

The single-thread picture is nuanced. The 12500H wins PassMark single-thread by 0.6% (3418 vs 3397) and dominates Cinebench R23 single-core by 57.8%, but the 13500H wins 3DMark single-thread by 4.4% (967 vs 924). The PassMark result reflects a real-world mix, while Cinebench R23 single-core is an outlier favoring the 12500H so heavily that it skews the overall impression.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel’s 10 nm process node and use a hybrid core layout, but they belong to different generations. The Intel Core i5-12500H uses Alder Lake architecture (codename Alder Lake-H), while the Intel Core i5-13500H uses Raptor Lake architecture (codename Raptor Lake-H). The core counts are identical: 12 cores and 16 threads on both chips.

The L1 cache is the same at 80 KB per core, and both share 18 MB of L3 cache. The key architectural divergence is L2 cache. The 12500H has 1.25 MB per core, while the 13500H has 2 MB per core — a 60% increase in per-core L2 capacity. The 13500H also has a larger die size footprint (217 mm² for the 12500H, with no listed die size for the 13500H), but the process node remains the same.

The integrated graphics differ slightly in naming: the 12500H has Iris Xe 80EU, while the 13500H has Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Both have the same 80 execution units, so graphical compute capability appears identical. The 13500H supports a wider range of memory types, including LPDDR4, LPDDR4X, LPDDR5, and LPDDR5X, in addition to the DDR4 and DDR5 that the 12500H supports.

PCIe support is a notable architectural shift. The 12500H provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the 13500H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This means the 13500H offers faster per-lane bandwidth but fewer lanes, which could affect multi-device configurations.

Specification Differences

The base and boost clocks differ, with the 13500H running higher. The 12500H has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The 13500H has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz — a 0.10 GHz base increase and a 0.20 GHz boost increase. Both have a TDP of 45 watts.

Both use the same socket (Intel BGA 1744) and are locked (multiplier not unlocked). Memory bus is dual-channel on both. ECC memory is not supported on either. The market segment is mobile for both, and both are listed as Active in production status.

The part numbers differ: the 12500H is SRLCY, while the 13500H is SRMLGSRMHY. The 13500H has a release date of 2023-01-03, while the 12500H has no release date listed. Neither has a launch MSRP in the data. The 12500H sits at the 76th percentile of all CPUs, while the 13500H sits at the 75th percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-12500H has an average benchmark score of 22625, which is 0.7% higher than the Intel Core i5-13500H’s 22468.

Q: How much faster is the 12500H in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The 12500H scores 19840 versus 14081 for the 13500H, a 40.9% advantage in favor of the 12500H.

Q: Does the 13500H win any multi-threaded tests?

A: Yes, the 13500H wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 13.2% (2304 vs 1999) and PassMark multithread by 3.5% (21366 vs 20625), among others.

Q: What is the difference in L2 cache size?

A: The 12500H has 1.25 MB per core, while the 13500H has 2 MB per core — a 60% higher per-core L2 allocation for the 13500H.

Q: Which CPU supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: The Intel Core i5-13500H supports PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel Core i5-12500H is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

Q: Are both CPUs the same process node?

A: Yes, both the 12500H (Alder Lake) and the 13500H (Raptor Lake) are built on Intel’s 10 nm process node.

The Verdict

The Intel Core i5-12500H is the better choice for users prioritizing sustained multi-core rendering and single-core consistency in Cinebench workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score is 40.9% higher, and its Cinebench R23 single-core score is 57.8% higher — margins too large to ignore for video editors or 3D artists. The 12500H also edges out in floating-point math and extended instructions, making it the stronger pick for compute-heavy scientific tasks.

The Intel Core i5-13500H is the better choice for users who need snappy, short-burst performance across a variety of everyday tasks. It wins all six 3DMark tests, indicating better responsiveness in gaming or interactive applications. Its 21% lead in PassMark physics and 23% lead in find prime numbers suggest superior handling of physics simulations and integer-heavy algorithms. The higher L2 cache (2 MB per core vs 1.25 MB) and PCIe Gen 5 support provide architectural headroom for future peripherals.

The data does not support a blanket “newer is better” conclusion. The 13500H wins more tests (13 vs 10), but the 12500H wins the tests that matter most for heavy rendering. For general productivity and mixed workloads, the 13500H’s 3DMark sweep and PassMark multithread lead make it the safer all-rounder. For professional rendering, the 12500H’s Cinebench dominance is the deciding factor. Choose based on your primary workload: render bursts favor the 12500H, interactive responsiveness favors the 13500H.