Intel Core i5-1335U vs Intel Core i5-13420H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database pits the Intel Core i5-1335U against the Intel Core i5-13420H across sixteen recorded tests. The results are decisively lopsided. The Core i5-13420H wins sixteen of the seventeen head-to-head comparisons, while the Core i5-1335U manages a single tie in Cinebench R15 single-core, where both chips record a score of 238. That tie is the only instance where the two processors match, and it signals that single-threaded performance is nearly identical between them, but the multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads tell a different story.

The biggest margin comes in PassMark extended instructions, where the Core i5-13420H scores 12,897 against the Core i5-1335U's 8,974, a delta of 30.4 percent. This is a massive gap for instruction-heavy workloads like encryption, compression, or scientific calculations that rely on AVX or similar extensions. The second-largest gap appears in PassMark data compression, where the 13420H records 209,450 versus 159,593, a 23.8 percent advantage. For anyone routinely compressing files or working with large archives, that difference is immediately tangible.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 13420H scores 11,084 against 8,889.5 for the 1335U, a 19.8 percent lead. This is the most commonly cited rendering benchmark, and the result indicates the 13420H sustains higher sustained throughput when all cores are active. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern: 6,013 versus 4,935, a 17.9 percent advantage. Even in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 13420H leads with 1,738 versus 1,464, a 15.8 percent gap.

The single-core Cinebench numbers are closer. In R20 single-core, the 13420H scores 848 versus 696, a 17.9 percent edge, but in R23 single-core the difference shrinks to just 0.3 percent (1,689 versus 1,684.5). The PassMark single-thread test shows a 1.8 percent lead for the 13420H (3,396 versus 3,336). So while the 13420H wins every single-threaded contest except the R15 tie, the margins are often narrow. The real separation appears when the workload scales across cores.

PassMark integer math shows the 13420H ahead by 11.9 percent (58,156 versus 51,244), while floating-point math sees a 17.8 percent gap (42,806 versus 35,176). PassMark multithread shows an 18.3 percent lead (17,475 versus 14,281). The physics test, which often simulates rigid body dynamics, has the 13420H at 1,012 against 837, a 17.3 percent difference. Data encryption shows a 13.4 percent gap (11,559 versus 10,009), and random string sorting shows an 18.6 percent lead (22,045 versus 17,953). Even the find prime numbers test, which is notoriously sensitive to clock speed and cache behavior, favors the 13420H by 7.7 percent (52 versus 48).

The database also lists average benchmark scores for each processor. The 1335U has an average score of 18,982, placing it at the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. The 13420H averages 18,511, which lands at the 72nd percentile. Despite the 13420H winning nearly every head-to-head test, its average score is slightly lower because the benchmark pool differs between the two entries, and the 1335U benefits from a wider set of tests that skew its average upward. The nearest rivals for the 1335U include the AMD EPYC 7773X at 18,979 (0 percent delta), the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19,039 (0.3 percent ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS at 19,047 (0.3 percent ahead). For the 13420H, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 3 PRO 8300GE at 18,505 (0 percent delta), the Intel Core i3-14100F at 18,519 (0 percent delta), and the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18,380 (0.7 percent behind).

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, and both use the same 10 nm process node from Intel's foundry. They share the same socket, Intel BGA 1744, and both are mobile-market parts. The similarities end there. The Core i5-1335U is a Raptor Lake-U chip, while the Core i5-13420H is a Raptor Lake-H part. The U suffix typically denotes a low-power, ultrabook-oriented design, while the H suffix indicates a higher-performance, high-power mobile processor.

The core counts differ. The 1335U has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the 13420H has 8 cores and 12 threads. This is a notable inversion: the lower-power chip has more physical cores, yet the higher-power chip still wins multi-threaded tests. The explanation lies in clock speeds and power delivery. The 1335U has a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The 13420H has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and the same 4.60 GHz boost. The higher base clock on the 13420H allows it to sustain higher throughput even with fewer cores, because it does not need to ramp up from as low a frequency.

The thermal design power differs substantially. The 1335U carries a TDP of 15 watts, while the 13420H carries a TDP of 45 watts. This threefold difference in power envelope directly explains why the 13420H can maintain higher clocks under sustained load. The 1335U is designed for fanless or low-noise laptops where heat dissipation is limited, whereas the 13420H is intended for larger chassis with active cooling.

Cache configurations also diverge. Both share the same L1 cache at 80 KB per core, and both have 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache differs: the 1335U has 1.25 MB per core, while the 13420H has 2 MB per core. This larger L2 allocation on the 13420H gives it more fast memory for frequently accessed data, which helps in workloads that exhibit locality.

Memory support is identical: both support DDR4 and DDR5, both use dual-channel memory buses, and neither supports ECC memory. PCIe support differs. The 1335U offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 13420H offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The newer PCIe standard on the 13420H provides higher bandwidth for discrete GPUs or fast NVMe storage, though the lane count is the same.

Integrated graphics are the same on both: Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units. So for GPU-accelerated tasks that rely on the iGPU, the two chips should perform identically. The release dates are also identical, with both launching on January 3, 2023. The 1335U has a launch MSRP of $340, while the 13420H has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. Both are marked as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either part.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i5-13420H wins across the entire spectrum of multi-threaded and compute-intensive workloads. Rendering, video encoding, 3D simulation, data compression, encryption, and mathematical calculations all favor the 13420H by double-digit margins in most cases. The 30.4 percent lead in extended instructions and the 23.8 percent lead in data compression make it the clear choice for users who run scientific software, compression tools, or any workload that leverages SIMD instructions. The 17.9 percent advantage in Cinebench R20 multi-core and the 19.8 percent lead in R23 multi-core indicate strong sustained performance for productivity applications like Adobe Premiere, Blender, or Visual Studio builds.

The Core i5-1335U wins exactly one contest: the Cinebench R15 single-core tie. But that tie is meaningful. It shows that for short, single-threaded bursts, the two chips deliver identical performance. For everyday tasks like web browsing, word processing, or spreadsheet work, users would be hard-pressed to notice a difference. The 1335U also holds a slight edge in average benchmark score (18,982 versus 18,511), which reflects the broader set of tests in its database entry. The 1335U's lower TDP of 15 watts makes it the better fit for thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals matter more than raw throughput. In a passive-cooled chassis, the 1335U can sustain its workload without throttling as aggressively as a 45-watt part would.

The 13420H, by contrast, belongs in a laptop with an active cooling solution and a larger battery. Its 45-watt TDP means it will generate more heat and drain power faster, but it repays that cost with 15.8 to 19.8 percent better multi-core scores across Cinebench variants. For users who occasionally render video, compile code, or run virtual machines, the 13420H is the stronger choice. The 1335U is better suited for users who prioritize portability and all-day battery life over peak performance.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-1335U has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-13420H has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Is the Core i5-13420H faster in multi-core workloads?

A: Yes. The 13420H leads in every multi-core benchmark recorded, including Cinebench R23 multi-core (11,084 versus 8,889.5, a 19.8 percent advantage) and PassMark multithread (17,475 versus 14,281, an 18.3 percent advantage).

Q: Are the single-core scores similar?

A: Mostly, with one tie. In Cinebench R15 single-core, both score 238. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 13420H leads by just 0.3 percent (1,689 versus 1,684.5). The 13420H has a 1.8 percent lead in PassMark single-thread (3,396 versus 3,336).

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core i5-1335U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Core i5-13420H has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Do both chips support the same memory?

A: Yes. Both support DDR4 and DDR5, both use dual-channel memory buses, and neither supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: Both use the same Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, so integrated graphics performance should be identical.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split. For users who need sustained multi-threaded performance, the Intel Core i5-13420H is the only rational choice. It wins sixteen of seventeen head-to-head comparisons, with margins ranging from 0.3 percent in single-core Cinebench R23 to 30.4 percent in extended instructions. The 45-watt TDP and higher 2.10 GHz base clock allow it to maintain throughput that the 15-watt 1335U cannot match, even though the 1335U has more physical cores. The 13420H is the better processor for rendering, compiling, compression, and any workload that scales with thread count.

The Intel Core i5-1335U is not without merit. Its single-core tie in Cinebench R15 and near-identical R23 single-core score show that light, bursty tasks will feel just as responsive. Its 15-watt TDP makes it the better fit for fanless or ultra-portable designs where battery life and thermals are paramount. The 1335U also carries a recorded launch MSRP of $340, while the 13420H has no listed MSRP, so pricing comparisons are not possible from the database.

The verdict is straightforward: choose the 13420H for performance, the 1335U for efficiency. The database confirms that the 13420H is the faster chip in nearly every measurable way, but the 1335U is the more power-conscious option. A user who buys a laptop with the 1335U gets a responsive machine for everyday tasks and long battery life. A user who buys a laptop with the 13420H gets a machine that handles heavy workloads with 15 to 30 percent more throughput, at the cost of significantly higher power consumption. The decision rests on which trade-off matters more for the intended use case.