Intel Core i5-13600H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

The Intel Core i5-13600H and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T are separated by two years of silicon evolution, yet their average benchmark scores are nearly identical. The data shows the Core Ultra 5 225T holds a razor-thin overall lead, with an average benchmark score of 30,468 against the i5-13600H’s 30,548, a margin of just 0.3%. Both processors sit at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier. However, this statistical tie masks a dramatic split in workload types: the Ultra 5 dominates multi-threaded rendering and single-core tasks, while the i5-13600H posts surprising wins in integer math and data compression.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victories for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T come in the Cinebench suite, where it outperforms the i5-13600H by a consistent margin of 43.6% across nearly every test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 scores 21,971 against the i5-13600H’s 12,402, a delta of -43.6% from the perspective of the older chip. Single-core results tell the same story: the Ultra 5 hits 3,101 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1,750 for the i5-13600H, again a 43.6% gap. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R15 and R20, with the Ultra 5 winning both multi-core and single-core iterations by the same 43.5–43.6% margin. The consistency of this delta across all six Cinebench runs indicates a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Outside of Cinebench, the Ultra 5 extends its lead in several PassMark tests. The largest single win is in the find_prime_numbers test, where the Ultra 5 scores 284 against the i5-13600H’s 87, a massive 69.4% advantage. Floating point math also favors the Ultra 5 heavily: 82,751 versus 57,618, a 30.4% lead. The Ultra 5 further wins in extended instructions (20,083 vs. 15,817, a 21.2% gap), data encryption (18,289 vs. 16,061, a 12.2% lead), physics (2,053 vs. 1,490, a 27.4% advantage), and multithreaded performance (25,358 vs. 23,304, a smaller 8.1% win). In single-threaded PassMark, the Ultra 5 scores 4,348 versus 3,631 for the i5-13600H, a 16.5% advantage.

The Intel Core i5-13600H fights back in three specific areas. Its most impressive win is in integer math, where it scores 78,658 against the Ultra 5’s 59,543, a 32.1% lead. Data compression also goes to the i5-13600H: 267,936 versus 233,998, a 14.5% advantage. The third win is narrow, with the i5-13600H taking random string sorting at 29,570 versus 28,774, a 2.8% margin. These wins are notable because they occur in workloads that often scale with memory bandwidth and cache hierarchy, suggesting the i5-13600H’s design is better tuned for certain data-intensive operations despite its older architecture.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the clear choice for rendering, scientific computing, and single-threaded responsiveness. Its Cinebench dominance—a 43.6% lead in every multi-core and single-core test—makes it the superior processor for video encoding, 3D rendering, and any workload that relies heavily on ray tracing or physics simulations. The 69.4% lead in prime number finding further cements its position for cryptographic and mathematical workloads. The Ultra 5 also wins in floating-point math by 30.4%, which is critical for financial modeling, engineering simulations, and machine learning inference. Its 16.5% single-thread lead means snappier application launches and better performance in lightly-threaded software.

The Intel Core i5-13600H wins where the workload is integer-heavy or involves data compression. Its 32.1% lead in integer math makes it the better fit for database operations, spreadsheet calculations, and legacy software that relies on integer arithmetic. The 14.5% advantage in data compression points to strengths in file archiving, backup utilities, and certain types of data serialization. The narrow 2.8% win in random string sorting suggests a slight edge in text processing and log analysis. These three wins are concentrated in a narrow band of workloads, but they are meaningful for users who spend most of their time in these specific tasks.

The multithreaded PassMark score is closer than the Cinebench results suggest. The Ultra 5 wins that test by 8.1% (25,358 vs. 23,304), which is a moderate advantage but far smaller than the 43.6% Cinebench gap. This discrepancy indicates that the Ultra 5’s advantage is amplified in certain multi-threaded scenarios but not others. The i5-13600H’s 12 cores and 16 threads versus the Ultra 5’s 10 cores and 10 threads likely explains why the older chip stays competitive in some parallel workloads, even as it loses badly in others.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split recommendation. For anyone running Cinebench-class workloads—rendering, video production, 3D modeling—the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the decisive winner. Its 43.6% lead across all Cinebench tests is too large to ignore, and its 69.4% advantage in prime number finding and 30.4% lead in floating-point math make it the superior choice for scientific and mathematical applications. The Ultra 5 also wins in single-threaded performance by 16.5%, which benefits everyday desktop responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications.

The Intel Core i5-13600H is the better pick only for users whose primary workloads are integer math, data compression, or random string sorting. Its 32.1% lead in integer math and 14.5% advantage in data compression are substantial, but these are niche workloads. The i5-13600H also holds a narrow 2.8% win in random string sorting, which is unlikely to be a deciding factor for most buyers. For general-purpose use, the Ultra 5’s broader dominance in rendering, physics, encryption, and single-thread performance makes it the safer recommendation.

Both processors occupy the same 82nd percentile and have nearly identical average scores, so neither is a bad choice. But the Ultra 5 wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, and its wins are typically by larger margins than the i5-13600H’s. The i5-13600H wins only 3 benchmarks, and two of those wins are by margins over 14%. The verdict is straightforward: the Ultra 5 is the more versatile and faster processor in most scenarios, while the i5-13600H is a specialized tool for integer-heavy and compression work.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-13600H has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 30,548, compared to the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T’s 30,468, a difference of 0.3%.

Q: How large is the Cinebench R23 multi-core gap?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T scores 21,971 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 43.6% higher than the Intel Core i5-13600H’s score of 12,402.

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-13600H win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the i5-13600H wins three benchmarks: integer math (78,658 vs. 59,543, a 32.1% lead), data compression (267,936 vs. 233,998, a 14.5% lead), and random string sorting (29,570 vs. 28,774, a 2.8% lead).

Q: What is the difference in core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core i5-13600H has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-13600H has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-threaded PassMark performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T scores 4,348 in PassMark single-thread, which is 16.5% higher than the Intel Core i5-13600H’s score of 3,631.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different foundries and process nodes. The Intel Core i5-13600H is built on Intel’s 10 nm process as part of the Raptor Lake-H architecture, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses TSMC’s 3 nm process with the Arrow Lake architecture. The Ultra 5 packs 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the i5-13600H’s transistor count and die size are not listed. This process advantage is likely a major factor in the Ultra 5’s superior single-core and multi-core Cinebench performance.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The i5-13600H has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5’s larger per-core caches and overall L3 allocation likely contribute to its wins in encryption and extended instructions, while the i5-13600H’s smaller cache footprint may explain its surprising integer math lead.

Memory support also diverges. The i5-13600H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus, while the Ultra 5 supports only DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a listed memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The i5-13600H’s memory bandwidth is not specified. The Ultra 5 also offers more PCIe lanes: 20 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only) versus 8 Gen 5 lanes on the i5-13600H. Integrated graphics differ as well: the i5-13600H has Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the Ultra 5 has Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units.

The market segments and sockets reflect their intended use. The i5-13600H is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1744 with a 45 W TDP, released in January 2023. The Ultra 5 is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1851 with a 65 W TDP, released in December 2024. The i5-13600H has a listed launch MSRP of $311, while the Ultra 5 has no launch MSRP in the data. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-13600H’s part number is SRMHZ, while the Ultra 5’s part number is unknown. Both processors are currently active in production.