Intel Core i7-13850HX vs Intel Xeon Phi 7290 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data paints a decisive picture: the Intel Core i7-13850HX wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Xeon Phi 7290 takes four. The most striking pattern is the sheer scale of the Core i7's victories in single-threaded and rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core i7 scores 4,333 against the Xeon Phi's 2,140, a 50.6% advantage. The gap widens even further in PassMark's single-thread test, where the Core i7's 3,769 dwarfs the Xeon Phi's 485, representing an 87.1% delta. This is not a close contest in any latency-sensitive task.

Multi-core rendering follows the same trajectory. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i7 posts 30,695 versus the Xeon Phi's 15,163, again a 50.6% difference. The same ratio holds across Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests, with the Core i7 scoring 3,093 and 12,891 respectively, against the Xeon Phi's 1,528 and 6,368. PassMark's multithread score shows a 51.6% edge for the Core i7 (36,870 vs. 17,839). Even in floating-point math, a traditional strength for many-core accelerators, the Core i7 wins decisively: 92,369 versus 47,417, a 48.7% margin.

The Xeon Phi 7290's victories are narrower but notable in specific niches. Its biggest win comes in PassMark's extended instructions test, where it scores 41,517 against the Core i7's 26,586, a 56.2% advantage. Data compression also favors the Xeon Phi: 564,535 versus 441,525, a 27.9% lead. Random string sorting goes to the Xeon Phi by 39.4% (68,593 vs. 49,198). The fourth win is razor-thin: integer math at 126,922 versus 126,852, a 0.1% margin that is effectively a statistical tie.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the data. The Intel Core i7-13850HX is the outright winner for any workload that depends on high clock speeds and modern core efficiency. Its 5.30 GHz boost clock, combined with 20 cores and 28 threads, delivers superior results in Cinebench rendering across all versions, single-threaded tasks, encryption (26,062 vs. 12,505, a 52% edge), prime number finding (184 vs. 114, 38% ahead), and physics calculations (2,483 vs. 2,257, 9.1% ahead). For software development, content creation, and general productivity, the Core i7 is the clear choice.

The Xeon Phi 7290, despite its age and lower clock speeds, still holds advantages in vectorized and memory-bandwidth-heavy operations. Its 72 cores and 288 threads, while slower individually, excel at data compression, extended instruction sets (likely AVX-512 style workloads), and string sorting. The database shows the Xeon Phi wins PassMark's integer math by a hair, suggesting that certain massively parallel integer workloads can still saturate its many cores. This makes it a niche processor for specific scientific or enterprise batch jobs, but not a general-purpose winner.

In practical terms, the Core i7-13850HX is the superior processor for interactive use, real-time processing, and any application that cannot perfectly scale across hundreds of threads. The Xeon Phi's wins are confined to workloads that are explicitly vectorized or that involve large data streams where its 72 cores can compensate for low per-core performance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies from Intel. The Xeon Phi 7290, released in 2016, uses the Knights Landing architecture on a 14 nm process. It packs 72 cores and 288 threads into a 245 W TDP, with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost of 1.70 GHz. It has 32 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with no L3 cache listed. Memory support is DDR4 with ECC, and it uses the Intel Socket 3647. The transistor count is 8,000 million.

The Core i7-13850HX, from the Raptor Lake-HX generation released in 2023, is built on a 10 nm process. It has 20 cores and 28 threads, a 55 W TDP, and clocks of 2.10 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost. Its cache hierarchy is more generous: 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB of shared L3. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with ECC, uses a dual-channel memory bus, and integrates PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes. It also includes UHD Graphics 770, which the Xeon Phi lacks entirely.

The die size difference is notable: the Core i7 measures 257 mm², while the Xeon Phi's die size is not recorded. The Core i7 is also multiplier-unlocked and has an active production status, whereas the Xeon Phi's status is not listed. The socket difference (BGA 1964 for mobile vs. Socket 3647 for server) underscores their intended markets: mobile workstation versus server/workstation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The Intel Core i7-13850HX dominates. It scores 4,333 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 2,140 for the Xeon Phi, and 3,769 versus 485 in PassMark single-thread, an 87.1% advantage.

Q: Does the Xeon Phi 7290 have any advantages in modern workloads?

A: Yes, but only in specific areas. It leads by 56.2% in extended instructions, 39.4% in random string sorting, and 27.9% in data compression. These suggest strengths in vectorized or batch data processing.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Xeon Phi has 72 cores and 288 threads, while the Core i7 has 20 cores and 28 threads. Despite having over three times the cores, the Xeon Phi loses most benchmarks due to its much lower clock speeds.

Q: Which processor is better for Cinebench rendering?

A: The Core i7-13850HX is significantly better. It wins all Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests by approximately 50.6% margins, scoring 30,695 versus 15,163 in R23.

Q: Are both processors compatible with ECC memory?

A: Yes, both support ECC memory. The Xeon Phi supports DDR4 with ECC, while the Core i7 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with ECC.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each?

A: The Xeon Phi 7290 sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, while the Core i7-13850HX is at the 90th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 53,469 and 50,761 respectively.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Xeon Phi 7290 | Intel Core i7-13850HX |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 72 | 20 |

| Threads | 288 | 28 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 1.70 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 245 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 3647 | Intel BGA 1964 |

| Architecture | Knights Landing | Raptor Lake |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | Not listed | 257 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 32 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | None | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Not listed | Dual-channel |

| PCIe | Not listed | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Server/Workstation | Mobile |

| Production Status | Not listed | Active |

| Release Date | 2016-06-19 | 2023-01-03 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $428 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SR2WY | SRMEA |