Intel Core i9-13900T vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX and Intel Core i9-13900T represent two distinct approaches to Intel’s modern CPU lineup, and the benchmark data reveals a clear split: the mobile Ultra 7 wins the majority of head-to-head tests (11 wins vs. 6), but the desktop i9 dominates in raw single-core Cinebench runs and a few specialized workloads. The Ultra 7 255HX is the more balanced all-rounder, while the i9-13900T is a specialist in legacy single-threaded performance and specific integer tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has a higher average benchmark score of 62,738, compared to 61,723 for the Intel Core i9-13900T. This places the Ultra 7 in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, while the i9 sits in the 92nd percentile.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-threaded Cinebench R23 performance?

A: The Intel Core i9-13900T wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 36,517, beating the Ultra 7 255HX’s 32,612 by 10.7%. This is despite the Ultra 7 having fewer cores and threads (20/20 vs. 24/32).

Q: What is the single-core performance difference in Cinebench R23?

A: This is the i9-13900T’s biggest win. It scores 5,155 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 58% higher than the Ultra 7 255HX’s 2,163. The i9 also wins R15 single-core by 37%.

Q: Which CPU is better for encryption workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX is significantly better. It scores 39,499 in PassMark data encryption, which is 14.8% higher than the i9-13900T’s 34,415.

Q: Does the i9-13900T support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i9-13900T supports ECC memory (true), while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX does not (false). The i9 also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, whereas the Ultra 7 only supports DDR5.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core i9-13900T?

A: The launch MSRP is $549. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has no launch MSRP listed in the data.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX uses the Arrow Lake-HX architecture (Arrow Lake) fabricated on a 3 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Core i9-13900T uses the Raptor Lake architecture (Raptor Lake-S) on a 10 nm process by Intel. This node advantage gives the Ultra 7 a much smaller die size of 243 mm² compared to 257 mm² for the i9, despite the i9 having more cores.

Core counts differ substantially. The Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the i9-13900T has 24 cores and 32 threads. The i9’s thread advantage comes from Hyper-Threading, which the Ultra 7 does not employ. Cache layouts also diverge: the Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, while the i9 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core. However, the i9 has a larger shared L3 cache at 36 MB versus 30 MB for the Ultra 7.

Memory support is another key differentiator. The Ultra 7 255HX supports only DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The i9-13900T supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory, though its memory bandwidth is not listed. The i9 also supports ECC memory, which the Ultra 7 does not.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Ultra 7 255HX features an Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the i9-13900T has UHD Graphics 770. Both processors use PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only), but they target different market segments: the Ultra 7 is a mobile chip on the Intel BGA 2114 socket, while the i9 is a desktop chip on the Intel Socket 1700.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear pattern: the Ultra 7 255HX wins in most modern and computational workloads, but the i9-13900T takes decisive victories in legacy single-core tests and a few specific multi-core scenarios. Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 7 wins with a score of 4,916 against 3,680, a 33.6% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Ultra 7 wins again (17,187 vs. 15,337, a 12.1% lead), and it also takes R20 single-core by the same 12.1% margin (2,426 vs. 2,165).

The i9-13900T strikes back hard in Cinebench R23. It wins multi-core with 36,517 vs. 32,612 (10.7% ahead) and dominates single-core with 5,155 vs. 2,163, a massive 58% lead. This single-core R23 result is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head set. The i9 also wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 37% (519 vs. 327).

In PassMark tests, the Ultra 7 255HX wins the majority. It takes data encryption (39,499 vs. 34,415, +14.8%), extended instructions (41,247 vs. 29,719, +38.8%), find prime numbers (400 vs. 175, +128.6%), floating point math (160,624 vs. 108,779, +47.7%), multithread (48,234 vs. 43,036, +12.1%), physics (2,926 vs. 2,497, +17.2%), and single thread (4,562 vs. 4,177, +9.2%). The i9 fights back in data compression (538,254 vs. 515,143, +4.3%), integer math (157,324 vs. 127,126, +19.2%), and random string sorting (63,358 vs. 62,591, +1.2%).

The most striking result is the Ultra 7’s 128.6% advantage in PassMark find prime numbers, showing a massive architectural strength in this specific workload. Conversely, the i9’s 58% lead in R23 single-core shows a legacy performance advantage that is not reflected in the PassMark single-thread test, where the Ultra 7 leads by 9.2%.

Specification Differences

The specifications that differ between the two processors are extensive. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads, while the Intel Core i9-13900T has 24 cores and 32 threads. Base clocks differ dramatically: the Ultra 7 runs at 2.40 GHz, while the i9 has a base clock of 1100.00 MHz (which appears to be a typo for 1.10 GHz, but the data states 1100.00). Boost clocks are closer, with the Ultra 7 at 5.20 GHz and the i9 at 5.30 GHz.

The TDP is a major difference: the Ultra 7 has a 55W TDP, while the i9 has a 35W TDP. The Ultra 7 is a mobile chip on the Intel BGA 2114 socket, while the i9 is a desktop chip on the Intel Socket 1700. The Ultra 7 uses a 3 nm process from TSMC with 17,800 million transistors, while the i9 uses a 10 nm process from Intel with no transistor count listed.

Cache configurations differ: the Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, while the i9 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core. The i9 has a larger L3 cache at 36 MB shared, compared to 30 MB shared for the Ultra 7. Memory support differs: the Ultra 7 supports only DDR5, while the i9 supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The Ultra 7 has a listed memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the i9 has none listed. ECC memory support is present only on the i9.

The integrated graphics are different: the Ultra 7 has Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the i9 has UHD Graphics 770. The Ultra 7 has an unlocked multiplier, while the i9 does not. The i9 has a launch MSRP of $549, while the Ultra 7 has no MSRP listed. The release dates differ, with the Ultra 7 released in 2025-01-12 and the i9 in 2023-01-03.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX wins in 11 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, making it the stronger choice for most workloads. It excels in floating point math (47.7% ahead), extended instructions (38.8% ahead), and find prime numbers (128.6% ahead). These results suggest the Ultra 7 is better suited for scientific computing, encryption, and any task that leverages modern instruction sets or heavy FPU usage. It also wins in Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core, indicating strong performance in older render tests and general multithreaded workloads. The Ultra 7’s wins in PassMark multithread and physics further solidify its position as the better all-rounder for productivity and computational tasks.

The Intel Core i9-13900T wins 6 benchmarks, but its victories are concentrated in specific areas. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core win (10.7% ahead) suggests it handles modern, heavily threaded render workloads better, likely due to its 24 cores and 32 threads. The i9’s Cinebench R15 and R23 single-core wins (37% and 58% ahead, respectively) are its most dominant results, making it the clear choice for legacy single-threaded applications or tasks that rely on a single fast core. The i9 also wins in integer math (19.2% ahead), data compression (4.3% ahead), and random string sorting (1.2% ahead), indicating strengths in database operations, archival tasks, and integer-heavy processing.

The Verdict

The data points to a distinct use-case split. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX should be chosen for modern, diverse workloads that benefit from its superior floating-point performance, encryption speed, and extended instruction handling. Its 11 benchmark wins, including a 128.6% lead in find prime numbers and a 47.7% lead in floating point math, make it the better processor for scientific calculations, data analysis, and security-related tasks. Its higher average benchmark score (62,738 vs. 61,723) and 93rd percentile ranking reinforce this conclusion.

The Intel Core i9-13900T is the pick for users who prioritize legacy single-core performance or specific integer-heavy tasks. Its 58% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core and 37% lead in R15 single-core are unmatched, making it ideal for older software that cannot utilize multiple cores effectively. The i9’s 10.7% win in R23 multi-core and 19.2% lead in integer math also make it a strong candidate for modern render workloads and integer processing. However, its lower average score and fewer overall wins mean it is not the better all-rounder. For most users, the Ultra 7 255HX offers the more balanced and future-proof performance profile, while the i9-13900T is a specialized tool for single-threaded legacy applications.