Intel Core i5-13490F vs Intel Core i5-13500T Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy between these two Raptor Lake desktop processors. The Intel Core i5-13490F dominates the comparison, winning 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core i5-13500T claims only 2 wins. The average benchmark score for the 13490F is 28,185, placing it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The 13500T posts an average score of 28,670, also in the 80th percentile, which is a narrow 1.7% gap in aggregate. However, the head-to-head deltas tell a different story: the 13490F leads by double digits in most compute-heavy tests, with the largest single margin being a 51.5% advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core.

The verdict for buyers is straightforward. The 13490F is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing raw multi-threaded performance, single-core speed, and content creation workloads. Its 65W TDP and higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz give it a decisive edge in every Cinebench iteration. The 13500T, with its 35W TDP, is a power-optimized part that only wins in floating-point math and integer math, and even then by slim margins of 2.3% and 0.8%, respectively. The data suggests the 13500T is meant for thermally constrained systems, not for chasing benchmark records.

The 13490F also holds a notable advantage in the database's nearest rival comparisons. Its closest rival, the Intel Core i9-11950H, has an average score of 28,332, which is 0.5% higher, meaning the 13490F trails that specific rival by a negligible margin. The 13500T's nearest rival, the Intel Core i5-12600, scores 28,646, a 0.1% delta in favor of the 13500T. Neither chip is a class leader, but the 13490F's benchmark profile is more consistent and more convincing.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-S die, and both are fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The die size is identical at 215 mm² for both parts. The core configurations, however, diverge significantly. The 13500T packs 14 cores and 20 threads, while the 13490F uses 10 cores and 16 threads. This means the 13500T has a 4-core and 4-thread advantage on paper, yet it loses in every multi-threaded benchmark except the two math tests. The explanation lies in clock speeds and power limits.

The base clock of the 13500T is 1600 MHz, which is 900 MHz lower than the 13490F's 2500 MHz base. The boost clocks also differ: 4.60 GHz for the 13500T versus 4.80 GHz for the 13490F. The TDP difference is substantial: 35W for the 13500T versus 65W for the 13490F. The lower power envelope forces the 13500T to operate at reduced sustained frequencies, which explains why its extra cores do not translate into higher scores. The cache hierarchy is identical: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode.

A key architectural difference is the integrated graphics. The 13500T includes UHD Graphics 770, while the 13490F has no integrated graphics at all. This makes the 13500T a more flexible option for systems without a discrete GPU. The PCIe lane counts also differ: the 13500T offers Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 13490F offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either part. The release dates are close: the 13500T launched on January 3, 2023, and the 13490F on February 9, 2023.

Where Each One Wins

The 13490F wins in almost every category that matters for desktop productivity and gaming. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 22,747 versus the 13500T's 11,028, a 51.5% lead. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison and indicates a massive advantage in rendering and video encoding workloads. The single-core tests also favor the 13490F heavily: Cinebench R23 single-core shows a 45.4% lead (3,211 versus 1,754), and PassMark single-thread shows a 6.5% lead (3,828 versus 3,580). For any application that relies on per-core performance, such as gaming or legacy software, the 13490F is clearly better.

The 13490F also wins in all PassMark productivity sub-tests except two. Data compression favors the 13490F by 17.4% (328,397 versus 271,348). Data encryption shows a 13.2% lead (17,902 versus 15,543). Extended instructions, which includes workloads like AVX and SSE, show a 20.3% lead (20,837 versus 16,599). Prime number finding, a test that stresses integer throughput, shows a 36% lead (114 versus 73). Physics simulation in PassMark shows a 41.9% lead (1,915 versus 1,112). Random string sorting, which tests memory access patterns, shows a 15.1% lead (34,042 versus 28,893). The multithread score also favors the 13490F by 14.7% (26,569 versus 22,654).

The 13500T's only wins are in PassMark floating-point math (61,640 versus 60,273, a 2.3% lead) and PassMark integer math (84,427 versus 83,723, a 0.8% lead). These margins are small and may reflect the 13500T's different core scheduling under lower power limits. In practice, these two wins are unlikely to offset the massive deficits elsewhere. The data strongly suggests that the 13500T is a specialized low-power SKU, while the 13490F is a general-purpose performer.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-13490F wins all single-core tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3,211 versus 1,754 for the 13500T, a 45.4% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3,828 versus 3,580, a 6.5% lead.

Q: Does the 13500T's higher core count help in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Despite having 14 cores and 20 threads versus the 13490F's 10 cores and 16 threads, the 13500T loses every multi-threaded Cinebench test. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 11,028 for the 13500T versus 22,747 for the 13490F, a 51.5% deficit. The 13490F's higher clocks and 65W TDP overcome the core deficit.

Q: Are these CPUs overclockable?

A: No. Both the Intel Core i5-13500T and the Intel Core i5-13490F have locked multipliers, so neither supports overclocking.

Q: Do both CPUs have integrated graphics?

A: No. The 13500T includes Intel UHD Graphics 770, while the 13490F has no integrated graphics. The 13490F requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: What memory types do these CPUs support?

A: Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. Neither supports ECC memory.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The 13500T's average score of 28,670 is 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i5-12600's 28,646. The 13490F's average score of 28,185 is 0.5% lower than the Intel Core i9-11950H's 28,332, making that rival slightly faster in aggregate.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals the starkest contrast. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 13490F scores 2,292 versus 1,945 for the 13500T, a 15.1% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a 23.5% lead (323 versus 247). Moving to Cinebench R20, the multi-core gap is 16.1% (9,553 versus 8,011), and the single-core gap is 16.2% (1,348 versus 1,130). The most dramatic result is Cinebench R23 multi-core: 22,747 for the 13490F against 11,028 for the 13500T, a 51.5% deficit for the 13500T. Even the single-core R23 test shows a 45.4% gap (3,211 versus 1,754). These numbers indicate that the 13490F is not just faster, it is in a different performance tier.

The PassMark suite tells a similar story with a few exceptions. Data compression shows the 13490F ahead by 17.4% (328,397 versus 271,348). Data encryption shows a 13.2% lead (17,902 versus 15,543). Extended instructions show a 20.3% lead (20,837 versus 16,599). Prime number finding shows a 36% lead (114 versus 73). Physics simulation shows a 41.9% lead (1,915 versus 1,112). Random string sorting shows a 15.1% lead (34,042 versus 28,893). The multithread score shows a 14.7% lead (26,569 versus 22,654). Single-thread performance shows a 6.5% lead (3,828 versus 3,580).

The 13500T's victories are narrow and isolated. In floating-point math, it scores 61,640 versus 60,273, a 2.3% margin. In integer math, it scores 84,427 versus 83,723, a 0.8% margin. These are the only two tests where the 13500T outperforms the 13490F, and the deltas are far smaller than the losses elsewhere. The overall win count is 15 for the 13490F and 2 for the 13500T.

Specification Differences

The two processors share many core specifications: both use the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process, both have a 215 mm² die, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, and both have 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The L1 cache is 80 KB per core and the L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core on both parts. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The differences are as follows. The 13500T has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the 13490F has 10 cores and 16 threads. The base clock is 1600 MHz for the 13500T and 2500 MHz for the 13490F. The boost clock is 4.60 GHz for the 13500T and 4.80 GHz for the 13490F. The TDP is 35W for the 13500T and 65W for the 13490F. The 13500T includes Intel UHD Graphics 770, while the 13490F has no integrated graphics. The PCIe configuration is Gen 5 with 20 lanes for the 13500T and Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the 13490F. The launch MSRP is $232 for the 13500T and $235 for the 13490F. The release dates are January 3, 2023, for the 13500T and February 9, 2023, for the 13490F. The part numbers are SRMBQ for the 13500T and SRMC0 for the 13490F.