Core i9-13900F vs Core Ultra 7 255HX

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 i9-13900F vs Core Ultra 7 255HX 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 i9-13900F vs Core Ultra 7 255HX: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i9-13900F

2023

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+20% larger total L3 cache (36 MB vs 30 MB).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core Ultra 7 255HX.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $524 MSRP, while Core Ultra 7 255HX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌18.2% higher power demand at 65W vs 55W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 255HX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 255HX

2025

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 65W, a 10W reduction.
✅20% more PCIe lanes (24 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc Xe-LPG, while Core i9-13900F needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i9-13900F across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (16,885 vs 17,199).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (30 MB vs 36 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i9-13900F.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i9-13900F better than Core Ultra 7 255HX?

Yes. Core i9-13900F is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.9% better Geekbench multi-core, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i9-13900F is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.7% 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 i9-13900F is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 24 cores and 32 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 i9-13900F is the better buy right now. Core i9-13900F comes in at an unclear MSRP at $524 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (93.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core Ultra 7 255HX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2023). That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core i9-13900F vs Core Ultra 7 255HX Technical Specifications

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

Core i9-13900F

The Core i9-13900F 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 24 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 36 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: 48,934 points. Launch price was $524.

Core Ultra 7 255HX

The Core Ultra 7 255HX is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2025-01-01. It is based on the Arrow Lake-HX (2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2114. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 49,765 points. Launch price was $450.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i9-13900F packs 24 cores / 32 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 255HX offers 20 cores / 20 threads — the Core i9-13900F has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.5 GHz on the Core i9-13900F versus 5.2 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 255HX — a 5.6% clock advantage for the Core i9-13900F (base: 2 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Core i9-13900F uses the Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) architecture (Intel 7 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 255HX uses Arrow Lake-HX (2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-13900F scores 48,934 against the Core Ultra 7 255HX's 49,765 — a 1.7% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255HX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,801 vs 2,923, a 4.3% lead for the Core Ultra 7 255HX that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 17,199 vs 16,885 (1.8% advantage for the Core i9-13900F). L3 cache: 36 MB (total) on the Core i9-13900F vs 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 255HX.

Feature	Core i9-13900F	Core Ultra 7 255HX
Cores / Threads	24 / 32+20%	20 / 20
Boost Clock	5.5 GHz+6%	5.2 GHz
Base Clock	2 GHz	2.4 GHz+20%
L3 Cache	36 MB (total)+20%	30 MB (total)
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-HX (2025)
PassMark	48,934	49,765+2%
Cinebench R23 Multi	37,326	—
Geekbench 6 Single	2,801	2,923+4%
Geekbench 6 Multi	17,199+2%	16,885

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i9-13900F uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core Ultra 7 255HX uses FCBGA2114 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-5600 on the Core i9-13900F versus DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 7 255HX — the Core Ultra 7 255HX supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 192 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (Core i9-13900F) vs 24 (Core Ultra 7 255HX) — the Core Ultra 7 255HX offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: LGA1700 (Core i9-13900F) and Intel HM870,Intel WM880 (Core Ultra 7 255HX).

Feature	Core i9-13900F	Core Ultra 7 255HX
Socket	LGA1700	FCBGA2114
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-5600	DDR5-6400+14%
Max RAM Capacity	192 GB	192 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	20	24+20%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core Ultra 7 255HX has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Core i9-13900F supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i9-13900F) vs true (Core Ultra 7 255HX). The Core Ultra 7 255HX includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG), while the Core i9-13900F requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 7 255HX rivals Ryzen 9 9850HX.