Intel Core i9-13900HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T and Intel Core i9-13900HX are both 24-core processors that land at the 92nd percentile among all CPUs, yet they produce sharply different results across the benchmark suite. The data shows a clear split: the mobile i9-13900HX dominates the Cinebench render tests and several PassMark throughput workloads, while the desktop Ultra 9 285T fights back in single-threaded and specialized math tasks. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical — 46409 for the Ultra 9 285T versus 46613 for the i9-13900HX, a 0.4% gap — but the distribution of wins is lopsided, with the i9-13900HX taking 12 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern is consistency: across all six Cinebench tests, the i9-13900HX wins by exactly 14.2%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-13900HX scores 36597 against 31399 for the Ultra 9 285T; in single-core, it posts 5166 versus 4432. The same margin repeats in Cinebench R15 (3688 vs 3164 multi-core, 520 vs 446 single-core) and R20 (15370 vs 13187 multi-core, 2169 vs 1861 single-core). This uniformity suggests a fundamental throughput advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark results are less uniform. The i9-13900HX wins data compression by 38.3% (531224 vs 328003), random string sorting by 30.6% (59199 vs 41091), and extended instructions by 28.1% (30550 vs 21956). It also leads integer math by 13% (156175 vs 135890), data encryption by 10.3% (32130 vs 28813), and the multithread aggregate by 14.2% (43062 vs 36940).

The Ultra 9 285T counters with three wins that are large in percentage terms. Its single-thread PassMark score of 4775 beats the i9-13900HX’s 4081 by 17%. In find prime numbers, the Ultra 9 285T scores 319 against 190 — a 67.9% advantage. Floating point math also favors the desktop part, 129032 vs 110470, a 16.8% lead. Physics is closer: 2875 vs 2645, an 8.7% win for the Ultra 9 285T.

The overall win tally, 12-5 in favor of the i9-13900HX, understates the magnitude of the Ultra 9 285T’s single-threaded edge. That 17% delta is the largest win for either side outside the prime-number test. Meanwhile, the i9-13900HX’s 38.3% compression lead is its biggest, followed by the 30.6% sorting advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design eras and foundries. The Ultra 9 285T uses Arrow Lake-S architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC, with 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The i9-13900HX is Raptor Lake-HX on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a 257 mm² die and no transistor count listed.

Both have 24 cores and 36 MB of shared L3 cache, but the similarity ends there. The Ultra 9 285T has 24 threads — one per core — while the i9-13900HX has 32 threads, implying hyperthreading on some cores. Per-core cache also differs: the Ultra 9 285T has 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core, versus 80 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2 per core for the i9-13900HX.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The i9-13900HX has a higher base clock of 2.20 GHz versus 1.40 GHz, but both boost to 5.40 GHz. The i9-13900HX’s higher base clock combined with its 32 threads likely explains much of its multi-threaded dominance. The Ultra 9 285T’s TSMC 3 nm node may contribute to its single-threaded PassMark efficiency, though the data does not isolate that effect.

Memory support splits cleanly: the Ultra 9 285T supports DDR5 only with dual-channel bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the i9-13900HX supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure listed. Both support ECC memory and both expose Gen 5 PCIe with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ultra 9 285T ships with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units; the i9-13900HX has UHD Graphics 770. The Ultra 9 285T is desktop-class on Intel Socket 1851, while the i9-13900HX is mobile-class on Intel BGA 1964. The i9-13900HX has an unlocked multiplier; the Ultra 9 285T does not.

Where Each One Wins

The i9-13900HX is the clear choice for multi-threaded rendering and data-heavy PassMark workloads. Its 14.2% sweep across all Cinebench versions — R15, R20, and R23, both single and multi-core — makes it the stronger processor for any task that follows those render patterns. The compression result (531224 vs 328003) suggests significant advantages in archiving or database-style workloads, and the 30.6% sorting lead reinforces that. Integer math, encryption, and the overall multithread aggregate all favor the i9-13900HX, so any application that parallelizes well across 32 threads will see a measurable gain.

The Ultra 9 285T wins where single-threaded efficiency or specialized math dominates. Its 17% PassMark single-thread lead (4775 vs 4081) is its most broadly applicable advantage, affecting everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications. The 67.9% prime-number win is extreme but narrow — that test measures a specific integer operation pattern. Floating point math at 16.8% ahead (129032 vs 110470) matters for scientific or simulation workloads that use FPU-heavy code. The physics win, 8.7%, is modest but consistent with the floating-point strength.

For mixed workloads, the average scores are nearly tied, but the benchmark wins are not evenly distributed. The i9-13900HX leads the aggregate PassMark multithread score by 14.2%, while the Ultra 9 285T leads single-thread by 17%. Users should pick based on whether their primary applications scale with threads or rely on single-core speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core PassMark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T scores 4775 in PassMark single-thread, compared to 4081 for the i9-13900HX, a 17% advantage.

Q: How much faster is the i9-13900HX in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The i9-13900HX scores 36597 versus 31399 for the Ultra 9 285T, a 14.2% lead that is identical across all six Cinebench tests.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: No. Both have 24 cores, but the Ultra 9 285T has 24 threads while the i9-13900HX has 32 threads.

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

A: The Ultra 9 285T wins PassMark find prime numbers by 67.9% (319 vs 190). The i9-13900HX’s largest win is PassMark data compression at 38.3% (531224 vs 328003).

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the Intel Core i9-13900HX supports DDR4; the Ultra 9 285T supports DDR5 exclusively.

Q: Are both processors in the same market segment?

A: No. The Ultra 9 285T is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1851, while the i9-13900HX is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 1964.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 285T | Intel Core i9-13900HX |

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

| Threads | 24 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel BGA 1964 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Process Node | 3 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 257 mm² |

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

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

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Launch MSRP | $549 | $668 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SRQD3 | SRMEC |

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a straightforward split. The Intel Core i9-13900HX is the faster processor in aggregate multi-threaded work, winning 12 of 17 head-to-head tests including every Cinebench benchmark and the PassMark multithread score. Its 32 threads and 2.20 GHz base clock give it a structural advantage in heavily parallel workloads, and the 14.2% Cinebench margins are consistent enough to be predictive.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285T is the better choice for single-threaded responsiveness and specific math-heavy tasks. Its 17% PassMark single-thread lead and 67.9% prime-number win show a real per-core efficiency edge, likely tied to its 3 nm TSMC process. The floating-point math advantage (16.8%) makes it preferable for FPU-dominated code.

For a mobile workstation or laptop user running renders, compression, or integer-heavy code, the i9-13900HX is the data-supported pick. For a desktop user prioritizing single-thread speed, physics, or floating-point math, the Ultra 9 285T wins. The average scores are nearly tied — 46409 vs 46613 — so neither processor is categorically superior; the right choice depends entirely on whether the workload scales across 32 threads or leans on single-core performance.