Intel Core i5-7500 vs Intel Core i9-13900E Comparison

The Intel Core i9-13900E and the Intel Core i5-7500 represent two very different eras of desktop computing. The former is a 24-core Raptor Lake part designed for heavy multitasking and content creation, while the latter is a 4-core Kaby Lake processor aimed at standard consumer workloads. The benchmark data in the database shows a complete sweep in favor of the i9-13900E, which wins all eight recorded head-to-head tests. However, the magnitude of those wins varies dramatically by workload type, which makes the comparison more nuanced than a simple tally of victories.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i9-13900E wins every recorded benchmark in the database, but the scale of its advantage depends entirely on whether the workload scales with core count or single-thread speed. In multi-core tests, the i9-13900E is in a different league. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 34244 versus 5133 for the i5-7500 represents a lead of 567.1%. This is the result of the i9-13900E's 24 cores and 32 threads being put to work simultaneously, which completely overwhelms the i5-7500's 4 cores and 4 threads. The same pattern appears in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the i9-13900E scores 14382 against 2155, and in Cinebench R15 multicore, where it scores 3451 against 517.

The single-core results tell a different story in terms of relative margins, though the winner remains the same. The i9-13900E's Cinebench R23 singlecore score of 4834 is 567.7% higher than the i5-7500's 724. This is a massive gap, but it is notably the i5-7500's single-core performance is not entirely uncompetitive in other tests. In Geekbench singlecore, the i9-13900E scores 1646 against 1277 for the i5-7500, a much smaller advantage of 28.9%. This indicates that while the i9-13900E is clearly faster per core, the older i5-7500 architecture still holds up reasonably well in lightly threaded applications when compared to its own multi-core deficit.

The i5-7500 has no benchmark wins in the database. Its strengths are limited to the fact that it consumes the same 65 W TDP as the i9-13900E, which is remarkable given the performance disparity. The i5-7500 also has a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 1.80 GHz for the i9-13900E, but this does not translate into any benchmark advantage. For users running legacy software that is strictly single-threaded and does not benefit from modern instruction sets, the i5-7500 remains functional, but the data shows it is outclassed in every measurable way.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are separated by several generations of Intel architecture. The i9-13900E is built on Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-S die, while the i5-7500 uses Kaby Lake. This represents a jump from a 14 nm process node to a 10 nm process node, with the i9-13900E being manufactured by Intel on the smaller node. The die size for the i9-13900E is listed as 257 mm², while the i5-7500 has no die size recorded in the database.

Core configuration is the most obvious architectural divide. The i9-13900E offers 24 cores and 32 threads, while the i5-7500 offers 4 cores and 4 threads. This is a sixfold increase in core count and an eightfold increase in thread count. The i9-13900E's cache hierarchy is also vastly different: it has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-7500 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The total L3 cache advantage for the i9-13900E is sixfold, which helps with larger working sets in data-heavy applications.

Memory support differs as well. The i9-13900E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the i5-7500 supports only DDR4. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, but the i5-7500 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, whereas the i9-13900E does not have a bandwidth figure listed in the database. The i9-13900E also supports ECC memory, which the i5-7500 does not, making the newer part more suitable for error-sensitive workloads like unmanaged servers or workstations.

PCIe connectivity is another generational leap. The i9-13900E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the i5-7500 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. This means the i9-13900E offers significantly higher bandwidth for modern GPUs and NVMe storage. Integrated graphics also differ: the i9-13900E includes UHD Graphics 770, while the i5-7500 uses HD 630. Both parts have locked multipliers, so neither is intended for enthusiast overclocking. The i9-13900E uses the Intel Socket 1700 platform, while the i5-7500 uses Intel Socket 1151.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite provides the clearest picture of the performance gap. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i9-13900E scores 34244, which is 567.1% higher than the i5-7500's 5133. The single-core test shows a similar relative margin: 4834 versus 724, a difference of 567.7%. This consistency across the Cinebench R23 suite suggests that the i9-13900E's architecture is uniformly faster per clock and across all cores. Cinebench R20 replicates this pattern, with the i9-13900E scoring 14382 multicore against 2155, a 567.4% lead, and 2030 singlecore against 304, a 567.8% lead. Cinebench R15 follows suit with multicore scores of 3451 versus 517 (567.5% delta) and singlecore scores of 487 versus 72 (576.4% delta). The single-core deltas in Cinebench are consistently around 567-576%, which is intriguing because the i5-7500's boost clock of 3.80 GHz is not far below the i9-13900E's boost clock of 5.20 GHz in relative terms, yet the older architecture loses ground in every instruction-heavy test.

Geekbench results offer a different perspective. The multicore score for the i9-13900E is 8337, which is 130.4% higher than the i5-7500's 3619. This is a substantial lead, but it is smaller than the Cinebench multicore deltas, indicating that Geekbench's workload mix does not scale as aggressively with core count. The singlecore Geekbench score is 1646 versus 1277, a 28.9% advantage for the i9-13900E. This is by far the smallest margin in the entire head-to-head comparison, suggesting that for short, lightly threaded bursts of integer and floating-point work, the i5-7500's 3.80 GHz boost clock allows it to stay relatively close to the i9-13900E. However, the i9-13900E still wins, and the 28.9% lead is enough to make it the clear choice for any application where single-thread responsiveness matters.

The database also records PassMark results for the i5-7500, but no corresponding PassMark scores are listed for the i9-13900E, so direct comparisons are not possible. The i5-7500's PassMark data shows a single-thread score of 2253 and a multithread score of 6028, with specialized tests like data compression at 83250 and floating-point math at 13174. These numbers serve as a baseline for what the older chip can achieve, but without a matching i9-13900E result, they do not factor into the head-to-head analysis.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several key differences between the two processors. The i9-13900E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the i5-7500 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 1.80 GHz for the i9-13900E and 3.40 GHz for the i5-7500, while boost clocks are 5.20 GHz and 3.80 GHz respectively. Both have a TDP of 65 W. The i9-13900E uses Intel Socket 1700, and the i5-7500 uses Intel Socket 1151. The process node is 10 nm for the i9-13900E and 14 nm for the i5-7500. L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 64 KB per core, L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 256 KB per core, and L3 cache is 36 MB shared versus 6 MB shared. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the i9-13900E versus DDR4 only for the i5-7500. The i9-13900E supports ECC memory, the i5-7500 does not. PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the i9-13900E and Gen 3 with 16 lanes for the i5-7500. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 for the i9-13900E and HD 630 for the i5-7500. The i9-13900E was released on January 3, 2023, and the i5-7500 on January 2, 2017. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database, and both have locked multipliers. The i9-13900E has a die size of 257 mm², while the i5-7500 has no die size recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i5-7500 has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How much faster is the i9-13900E in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The i9-13900E scores 34244 in Cinebench R23 multicore, which is 567.1% higher than the i5-7500's score of 5133.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the i5-7500 comes close to the i9-13900E?

A: The smallest margin is in Geekbench singlecore, where the i9-13900E leads by 28.9% (1646 versus 1277). This is the closest result in the head-to-head data.

Q: Do both processors have the same power consumption?

A: Yes, both the i9-13900E and the i5-7500 have a TDP of 65 W.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The i9-13900E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the i5-7500 supports DDR4 only.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The i9-13900E supports ECC memory, but the i5-7500 does not.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the Intel Core i9-13900E is the superior processor in every recorded benchmark. Its 24 cores and 32 threads deliver multicore performance that is more than six times higher than the i5-7500 in Cinebench R23, with a 567.1% lead. Even in the closest test, Geekbench singlecore, the i9-13900E maintains a 28.9% advantage. The architectural gap between Raptor Lake and Kaby Lake is substantial, spanning process node, cache size, memory support, and PCIe generation. The i5-7500's only notable equalizer is its higher base clock of 3.40 GHz and its matching 65 W TDP, but neither translates into a benchmark win. Users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput, modern platform features like DDR5 and ECC memory, or high-bandwidth PCIe Gen 5 connectivity should choose the i9-13900E. Users who are constrained to the older Socket 1151 platform or who require only basic single-threaded performance for legacy applications may still find the i5-7500 functional, but the recorded data shows no scenario where it outperforms the i9-13900E.