Intel Core i9-13900HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235 Comparison

The Intel Core i9-13900HX and Intel Core Ultra 5 235 are separated by just 0.1% in average benchmark score (46,098 vs 46,062), placing both at the 89th percentile of all CPUs. Despite this statistical tie, the data reveals two fundamentally different processors: the i9-13900HX is a mobile multi-threading monster, while the Ultra 5 235 is a desktop chip that wins on single-thread and specialized math workloads. The head-to-head record is decisive — the i9-13900HX wins 11 of 17 benchmarks, with the Ultra 5 235 taking 6.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sheer scale of the i9-13900HX’s multi-core dominance is the story here. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i9-13900HX scores 4,494.5 versus the Ultra 5 235’s 1,488 — a 202% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a 139.2% lead (14,836 vs 6,202), and R23 multi-core is 88.9% ahead (27,900 vs 14,769). This is not incremental; it is a generational gap in raw thread throughput.

The single-core picture flips, but only slightly. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 235 wins by 1.4% (2,085 vs 2,056). PassMark single-thread confirms this trend with a 9.6% win for the Ultra 5 235 (4,516 vs 4,081). The i9-13900HX still takes Cinebench R15 single-core (296 vs 210, +41%) and R20 single-core (2,094 vs 875, +139.3%), indicating the older architecture’s higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz helps in certain legacy tests, but the newer chip’s efficiency wins in modern workloads.

In PassMark’s math suite, the two split wins based on workload type. The i9-13900HX crushes integer math: 156,175 vs 87,948, a 77.6% lead. It also wins data compression (531,224 vs 390,711, +36%) and random string sorting (59,199 vs 48,980, +20.9%). The Ultra 5 235 counters with floating-point math (117,951 vs 110,470, +6.3%), extended instructions (32,752 vs 30,550, +6.7%), and a massive win in find prime numbers (371 vs 190, +48.8%). This suggests the Arrow Lake architecture has a fundamentally stronger FPU and encryption/prime-number pipeline.

Data encryption is a narrow i9-13900HX win (32,130 vs 29,293, +9.7%), while PassMark multi-thread goes to the i9-13900HX by 13.9% (43,062 vs 37,816). Physics is nearly a tie, with the i9-13900HX ahead just 2.9% (2,645 vs 2,570). Overall, the i9-13900HX’s 11 wins are mostly large-margin multi-core victories, while the Ultra 5 235’s 6 wins are smaller but strategically placed in single-thread and specialized math.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different Intel eras and foundries. The i9-13900HX is built on Raptor Lake-HX using Intel’s 10 nm process, while the Ultra 5 235 uses Arrow Lake-S on TSMC’s 3 nm node. This process shift explains much of the efficiency difference: the Ultra 5 235 packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die, while the i9-13900HX uses a larger 257 mm² die with fewer unspecified transistors.

Core counts diverge sharply. The i9-13900HX has 24 cores and 32 threads; the Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores and 14 threads — no hyperthreading. Cache layouts also differ: the i9-13900HX has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 235 has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and only 24 MB shared L3. The Ultra 5 235’s larger per-core caches help its single-thread performance, but the i9-13900HX’s larger total L3 pool aids multi-threaded workloads.

Memory and platform support highlight their different market positions. The i9-13900HX supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, uses the Intel BGA 1964 socket, and is marked as a Mobile segment part. The Ultra 5 235 is desktop-only, supports only DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with a rated 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and uses the Intel Socket 1851. Both support PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. ECC memory is available on the i9-13900HX but not on the Ultra 5 235.

Integrated graphics differ: the i9-13900HX has UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 235 features Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. The i9-13900HX has an unlocked multiplier; the Ultra 5 235 does not. The i9-13900HX’s base clock is 2.20 GHz with a 5.40 GHz boost, while the Ultra 5 235 runs at 3.40 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The i9-13900HX has a 55 W TDP; the Ultra 5 235 has a 65 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-13900HX is the clear choice for heavily threaded, throughput-bound applications. Its 202% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 88.9% lead in R23 multi-core make it ideal for video rendering, 3D modeling, and any workload that scales across 24 cores and 32 threads. Its 77.6% integer math advantage and 36% data compression lead point to strengths in database operations, file archiving, and software compilation. The 20.9% win in random string sorting further cements its role in data processing and scripting workloads. Its 13.9% PassMark multi-thread win (43,062 vs 37,816) confirms it sustains high throughput under sustained load.

The Ultra 5 235 wins where per-core efficiency and modern instruction sets matter. Its 9.6% PassMark single-thread lead and 1.4% Cinebench R23 single-core win make it better for everyday responsiveness, office tasks, and lightly threaded applications. The 48.8% find prime numbers victory is striking — this workload often reflects encryption and hashing efficiency, suggesting the Ultra 5 235 is better for cryptographic operations and scientific computing with modular arithmetic. Its 6.3% floating-point math win and 6.7% extended instructions lead indicate superiority in physics simulations, AI inference, and multimedia encoding that uses SIMD instructions.

The 2.9% physics win for the i9-13900HX is negligible, but it shows the older chip can still keep pace in gaming physics. However, the Ultra 5 235’s 6.3% floating-point advantage suggests it would handle game logic and particle effects more efficiently per clock. For users who primarily run single-threaded productivity software or math-heavy scientific tools, the Ultra 5 235’s 6 wins are more relevant despite the overall loss.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900HX scores 46,098 versus the Ultra 5 235’s 46,062, a 0.1% difference. Both sit at the 89th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Is the Ultra 5 235 faster in any multi-core test?

A: No. The i9-13900HX wins every multi-core benchmark in the head-to-head set, including Cinebench R23 multi-core (27,900 vs 14,769) and PassMark multi-thread (43,062 vs 37,816).

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between these two chips?

A: The i9-13900HX leads by 202% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (4,494.5 vs 1,488). The Ultra 5 235’s largest win is 48.8% in PassMark find prime numbers (371 vs 190).

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory?

A: No. The i9-13900HX supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 235 supports only DDR5. Both use a dual-channel bus, but the Ultra 5 235 has a rated 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which chip is better for single-threaded performance?

A: The Ultra 5 235 wins PassMark single-thread (4,516 vs 4,081, +9.6%) and Cinebench R23 single-core (2,085 vs 2,056, +1.4%). The i9-13900HX wins Cinebench R15 and R20 single-core tests.

Q: Are these chips from the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The i9-13900HX uses Intel’s 10 nm process, while the Ultra 5 235 uses TSMC’s 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split: pick the Intel Core i9-13900HX for maximum multi-threaded performance, and pick the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 for single-thread efficiency and specialized math workloads. The i9-13900HX’s 11 head-to-head wins are dominated by massive margins — 202% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 139.2% in R20 multi-core, and 77.6% in integer math. No amount of architectural efficiency on the Ultra 5 235 can compensate for 14 cores versus 24 cores and 32 threads versus 14 threads.

However, the Ultra 5 235 is not a loser. Its 9.6% PassMark single-thread lead and 48.8% find prime numbers win show it is the better choice for scientific computing, cryptography, and everyday responsiveness. The 6.3% floating-point math advantage and 6.7% extended instructions lead make it attractive for simulation and media workloads. Its 3 nm TSMC process and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth give it a modern foundation.

For a laptop user needing portable rendering or compile power, the i9-13900HX is the obvious pick, and its unlocked multiplier adds flexibility. For a desktop user focused on single-thread speed, math-heavy tasks, or lower power consumption per task, the Ultra 5 235 is the better fit, despite its locked multiplier and desktop-only socket. The 0.1% average score difference is misleading; the workload profile should dictate the choice, not the aggregate.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i9-13900HX | Intel Core Ultra 5 235 |

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

| Cores | 24 | 14 |

| Threads | 32 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1964 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 257 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not specified | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part Number | SRMEC | SRQAS |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $668 | $257 |