PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core i7-13700 vs Core Ultra 9 285T FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i7-13700 vs Core Ultra 9 285T: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core i7-13700

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $165 less on MSRP ($384 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Delivers 40.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 94.3 vs 67.2 PassMark/$ ($384 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 9 285T.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 9 285T across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (36,230 vs 36,916).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 36 MB).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Core Ultra 9 285T

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +14.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+20% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 67.2 vs 94.3 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $384 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i7-13700.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 9 285T better than Core i7-13700?

Yes. Core Ultra 9 285T is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 14.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.9% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 9 285T is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 14.4% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 9 285T is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.9% better PassMark, backed by 24 cores and 24 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 20% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 30 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 9 285T is still the faster CPU overall, but Core i7-13700 is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core Ultra 9 285T comes in 43.0% more expensive on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $384 MSRP, and it still gives you a 14.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-13700 is also 40.3% better value on MSRP (94.3 vs 67.2 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1700 + DDR5 setup, Core i7-13700 can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 9 285T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023), 20% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 30 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 24 cores / 24 threads instead of 16/24. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i7-13700 vs Core Ultra 9 285T Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core i7-13700

The Core i7-13700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 January 2023 (2 years ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture. It features 16 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on Intel 7 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-5600, DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 36,230 points. Launch price was $384.

Core Ultra 9 285T

The Core Ultra 9 285T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 24 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.4 GHz. L3 cache: 36 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 36,916 points. Launch price was $549.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-13700 packs 16 cores / 24 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285T offers 24 cores / 24 threads — the Core Ultra 9 285T has 8 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core i7-13700 versus 5.4 GHz on the Core Ultra 9 285T — a 3.8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 9 285T (base: 2.1 GHz vs 1.4 GHz). The Core i7-13700 uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 9 285T uses Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-13700 scores 36,230 against the Core Ultra 9 285T's 36,916 — a 1.9% lead for the Core Ultra 9 285T. L3 cache: 30 MB (total) on the Core i7-13700 vs 36 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 9 285T.

Feature	Core i7-13700	Core Ultra 9 285T
Cores / Threads	16 / 24	24 / 24+50%
Boost Clock	5.2 GHz	5.4 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.1 GHz+50%	1.4 GHz
L3 Cache	30 MB (total)	36 MB (total)+20%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	3 MB (per core)+50%
Process	Intel 7 nm	3 nm-57%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024)	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
PassMark	36,230	36,916+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-13700 uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core Ultra 9 285T uses LGA1851 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i7-13700 versus 6400 on the Core Ultra 9 285T — the Core Ultra 9 285T supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core Ultra 9 285T supports up to 256 GB of RAM compared to 192 GB — 33.3% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 20 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: Z790,B760 (Core i7-13700) and Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 9 285T).

Feature	Core i7-13700	Core Ultra 9 285T
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1851
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600	6400+14%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	256 GB+33%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Only the Core i7-13700 supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — UHD Graphics 770 (Core i7-13700) and Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics (Core Ultra 9 285T) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 9 285T rivals Ryzen 9 7900.

Feature	Core i7-13700	Core Ultra 9 285T
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	UHD Graphics 770	Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	Yes	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Core i7-13700 was priced at $384, while the Core Ultra 9 285T came in at $549. On launch pricing ($384 vs $549), Core i7-13700 was $165 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i7-13700 delivers 94.3 pts/$ vs 67.2 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 9 285T — making the Core i7-13700 the 33.5% better value option.

Feature	Core i7-13700	Core Ultra 9 285T
MSRP	$384-30%	$549
Performance per Dollar	94.3+40%	67.2
Release Date	2023	2025

Search Core i7-13700 on Amazon

Search Core Ultra 9 285T on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.