Intel Core i7-13850HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T and Intel Core i7-13850HX represent two distinct design philosophies from Intel, separated by two generations and aimed at different market segments. The Ultra 9 285T is a 35-watt desktop part built on a 3 nm process, while the i7-13850HX is a 55-watt mobile powerhouse on a 10 nm node. Despite their different targets, their average benchmark scores place them within 1.1% of each other, making them direct competitors in raw performance. The data shows a clear split: the Ultra 9 285T dominates in raw compute and single-threaded tasks, while the i7-13850HX fights back in specific memory and compression workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern across the head-to-head results is the consistency of the Ultra 9 285T’s victories. In the Cinebench suite, the Ultra 9 285T wins every single test by an identical 9.4% margin. This holds true for both multithreaded and single-threaded workloads across R15, R20, and R23. The R23 multicore score of 33573 against 30695, and the single-core score of 4739 against 4333, both reflect that same 9.4% advantage. This uniformity suggests a fundamental architectural edge rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The single-thread gap widens considerably in the Passmark suite. The Ultra 9 285T scores 4576 in Passmark single-thread, a 21.4% lead over the i7-13850HX’s 3769. This is a substantial margin that highlights the efficiency of the newer Arrow Lake design. The boost clock difference is small — 5.40 GHz versus 5.30 GHz — so the single-thread win comes from IPC improvements, not raw frequency.

The biggest win for the Ultra 9 285T comes in prime number finding, where it scores 345 versus 184, a massive 87.5% advantage. This is a workload that heavily favors the newer architecture’s integer execution capabilities. Floating-point math also shows a major divide: 137923 versus 92369, a 49.3% lead. These two results alone suggest that the Ultra 9 285T has a significantly more capable execution engine for mathematical workloads.

The i7-13850HX does score two wins, both in memory-related tasks. In data compression, it scores 441525 versus 384140, a 13% advantage. In random string sorting, it wins 49198 versus 47695, a smaller 3.1% margin. These results indicate that the older Raptor Lake design handles memory-heavy, pointer-chasing workloads more effectively, possibly due to different memory controller behavior or cache hierarchy organization.

The remaining results are closer. Data encryption favors the Ultra 9 285T by 23% (32061 versus 26062), extended instructions by 3.4% (27477 versus 26586), and integer math by 4.4% (132433 versus 126852). The multithread Passmark score gives the Ultra 9 285T an 8.3% win (39931 versus 36870), and the physics test shows a 14.5% advantage (2842 versus 2483). Overall, the Ultra 9 285T wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with the i7-13850HX taking only the two memory-oriented tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 9 285T is the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads. Its 49.3% lead in floating-point math and 87.5% lead in prime number finding make it well-suited for scientific computing, financial modeling, and any task that stresses the arithmetic logic units. The 21.4% single-thread advantage also makes it the better option for lightly-threaded applications like legacy software, scripting, and responsive desktop use. The 23% encryption win suggests it handles security-related tasks with greater efficiency.

The i7-13850HX’s wins are narrow but specific. Its 13% advantage in data compression and 3.1% lead in random string sorting point to a strength in workloads that involve large data movement and sorting algorithms. This could translate to better performance in file archiving, database sorting operations, or certain data processing pipelines. However, these are isolated victories — the i7-13850HX does not show a pattern of broader excellence in memory-bound tasks, as the Ultra 9 285T wins the multithread test by 8.3% despite having fewer threads.

For multithreaded productivity, the Ultra 9 285T’s 9.4% Cinebench R23 multicore win is the more relevant metric. It achieves this with 24 cores and 24 threads, while the i7-13850HX has 20 cores and 28 threads. The extra threads from Hyper-Threading on the i7-13850HX do not compensate for the architectural efficiency of the newer Arrow Lake design. The physics test, with a 14.5% Ultra 9 285T win, further reinforces that the newer part handles complex, multi-body simulations better.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T wins all single-thread benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 4739 against 4333 (a 9.4% lead), and in Passmark single-thread, it scores 4576 against 3769 (a 21.4% lead).

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-13850HX faster in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in two Passmark tests. It wins data compression with a score of 441525 versus 384140 (a 13% advantage) and random string sorting with 49198 versus 47695 (a 3.1% advantage).

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in multithreaded Cinebench performance?

A: The Ultra 9 285T consistently leads by 9.4% across R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests. The R23 results are 33573 for the Ultra 9 285T and 30695 for the i7-13850HX.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two CPUs?

A: The largest delta is in Passmark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 9 285T scores 345 versus 184, an 87.5% advantage. The smallest gap is a 3.1% win for the i7-13850HX in random string sorting.

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Ultra 9 285T has an average benchmark score of 51310, while the i7-13850HX scores 50761. The delta between them is 1.1% in favor of the Ultra 9 285T.

Q: Does the i7-13850HX have more threads?

A: Yes, it has 28 threads from 20 cores, while the Ultra 9 285T has 24 threads from 24 cores. Despite having fewer threads, the Ultra 9 285T wins the Passmark multithread test 39931 to 36870.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The Ultra 9 285T has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the i7-13850HX has 20 cores and 28 threads. Base clocks differ significantly: 1.40 GHz for the Ultra 9 285T versus 2.10 GHz for the i7-13850HX. Boost clocks are closer, with 5.40 GHz for the Ultra 9 285T and 5.30 GHz for the i7-13850HX. The thermal design power differs by 20 watts: 35 watts for the Ultra 9 285T versus 55 watts for the i7-13850HX.

The sockets are incompatible: the Ultra 9 285T uses Intel Socket 1851, while the i7-13850HX uses Intel BGA 1964. The process nodes are also different, with the Ultra 9 285T built on a 3 nm TSMC process and the i7-13850HX on a 10 nm Intel process. Die size is 243 mm² for the Ultra 9 285T and 257 mm² for the i7-13850HX. The Ultra 9 285T has a transistor count of 17,800 million, while the i7-13850HX does not list a transistor count.

Cache configurations differ across all levels. The Ultra 9 285T has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The i7-13850HX has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. Memory support varies: the Ultra 9 285T supports DDR5 only, while the i7-13850HX supports both DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is listed at 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 9 285T, while the i7-13850HX does not have a listed bandwidth figure. Both support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ, with the Ultra 9 285T featuring Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the i7-13850HX has UHD Graphics 770. The Ultra 9 285T has a locked multiplier, while the i7-13850HX is multiplier-unlocked. The market segments differ: the Ultra 9 285T is a desktop part, and the i7-13850HX is a mobile part. The Ultra 9 285T was released on 2025-01-06, while the i7-13850HX was released on 2023-01-03. The launch MSRP is $549 for the Ultra 9 285T and $428 for the i7-13850HX.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two CPUs is substantial. The Ultra 9 285T is built on the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. The i7-13850HX uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-HX, and belongs to Core 13th Gen. This generational gap is reflected in the process technology: the Ultra 9 285T uses a 3 nm TSMC process, while the i7-13850HX uses a 10 nm Intel process.

The core count and threading approach differ fundamentally. The Ultra 9 285T has 24 cores and 24 threads, indicating no Hyper-Threading. The i7-13850HX has 20 cores and 28 threads, meaning it uses Hyper-Threading on some cores to achieve the higher thread count. Despite having fewer threads, the Ultra 9 285T wins the Passmark multithread test by 8.3%, demonstrating that its architectural efficiency overcomes the thread count disadvantage.

Cache hierarchy design differs between the two. The Ultra 9 285T allocates more L1 and L2 cache per core (192 KB and 3 MB, respectively) compared to the i7-13850HX (80 KB and 2 MB). The shared L3 is also larger on the Ultra 9 285T at 36 MB versus 30 MB. The larger per-core caches likely contribute to the Ultra 9 285T’s significant wins in floating-point math and prime number finding, as more data can reside closer to the execution units.

The manufacturing and transistor differences are notable. The Ultra 9 285T is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process and contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The i7-13850HX is fabricated by Intel on a 10 nm process, with a slightly larger 257 mm² die and no listed transistor count. The smaller die and newer process node for the Ultra 9 285T, combined with its 35-watt TDP, indicate a significantly more power-efficient design compared to the i7-13850HX’s 55-watt TDP.

The integrated graphics solutions also reflect the architectural shift. The Ultra 9 285T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the i7-13850HX uses UHD Graphics 770. Both support ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, but the memory controllers differ: the Ultra 9 285T supports only DDR5 with a listed bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the i7-13850HX supports both DDR4 and DDR5 without a listed bandwidth. The Ultra 9 285T’s locked multiplier and desktop socket contrast with the i7-13850HX’s unlocked multiplier and mobile BGA socket, cementing their different market positions.