OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i5-13500H review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£270PassMark multi-core score:21028N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:4.7 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1744TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core i5-13500H Review: Compare 168 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.4/10

Overall score

Score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 45%, Reviews score 25%, List score 20%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 76% of models
Score components

45%

7.7

Technical score

25%

7.1

Reviews score

20%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 76% of processors
7.9

Value for money

Value for money
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 82% of models
Score components

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

â–²Better than 82%
7.7

Technical score

Technical score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 45% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 80% of models
Score components

60%

7.8

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

7.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

7.6

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 80%
7.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 61% of models

80%

7.6

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 61%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 20% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Best prices
    N/A~ £270
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i5-13500H

Technical score
Technical score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 45% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 80% of models
Score components:

60%

7.8

Performance

18%

7.3

Architecture

10%

7.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

7.6

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated graphics

7.7
Reviews score
7.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 82% of models
Score components:

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

7.9
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1744
This processor uses the FCBGA1744 CPU socket, which is older than that of 73.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
Chipset
WM790, HM770
This processor supports WM790, HM770 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 58.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 78.4% of processors and equal to that of 1.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.7 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.7 GHz which is higher than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 4% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
4x 2.6 GHz & 8x 1.9 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 4x2.6 GHz & 8x1.9 GHz which is higher than that of 75.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
21,028
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 21,028 in PassMark, which is higher than 71.8% of processors and equal to 0.1% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
L3 cache
18 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 18 MB which is larger than that of 74.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
L2 cache
10 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 79% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
L1 cache
1,088 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,088 KB which is larger than that of 87.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 6,400 MHz, which is higher than that of 82.6% of processors and equal to 8% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-6400 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-6400 MHz, which is higher than that of 89.5% of processors and equal to 2.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
96 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 96 GB of memory, which is more than 53.4% of processors and equal to 5.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU
This processor uses the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 78.5% of processors and equal to that in 2.4% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
80
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 80 GPU execution units, which is more than 91.4% of processors and equal to 3.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
95 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 95 W which is higher than that of 63.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.3% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 35 W
Show more

Intel Core i5-13500H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.27x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,828 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,828 vs 5,209
  • 2.63x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (7,379 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    7,379 vs 2,804.5
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 83.3% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,028 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,028 vs 11,469
  • 59.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,446 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,446 vs 1,535
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 6.0% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 61% of models

    80%

    7.6

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    7.1 vs 6.7
  • 10.1% better value for money
    Intel Core i5-13500H has better value for money than the average processor (7.92 vs 7.2).
    7.92 vs 7.2
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    January 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, VAES, SHA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, VAES, SHA vs AES, SHA
  • 2.27x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,828 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,828 vs 5,209
  • 2.63x better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (7,379 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    7,379 vs 2,804.5
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 83.3% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,028 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,028 vs 11,469
  • 59.3% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,446 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,446 vs 1,535
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 31.8% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,372 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,372 vs 2,558
  • 37.6% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (674 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    674 vs 490
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (4x2.6 GHz & 8x1.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    4x2.6 GHz & 8x1.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 6.8% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.7 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.7 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 3.33x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (10 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    10 MB vs 3 MB
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
  • 2.83x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1088 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,088 KB vs 384 KB
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (18 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    18 MB vs 9 MB
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • 2x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6400 MHz vs 3200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3200 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 50% more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (96 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    96 GB vs 64 GB
  • 3.33x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (80 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    80 vs 24
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel Iris Xe Graphics 80EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 65.7% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (136.4 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    136.4 vs 398.015
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 21.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (215 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    215 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 48.4% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (95 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    95 W vs 64 W
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP5
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP5
  • 65.7% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (136.4 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    136.4 vs 398.015
  • 18.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 21.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (215 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    215 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 48.4% higher boost power
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (95 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    95 W vs 64 W

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

7.0
TechTablets
≈ estimated
17/10/2023
Hands-on review · performance, gaming and storage tests
Verdict
Intel Core i5-13500H is a strong CPU for a mini PC, but storage, gaming and connectivity limits hold it back.
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Overview video
Not graded
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i5-13500H

  • Strong multi-core performance for multitasking and productivity tasks like engineering and video editing
  • Excellent value for mid-range gaming and office work when paired with a discrete GPU
  • Modern feature support including DDR5 memory and PCIe 5.0
  • Faster performance and better multitasking compared to Apple M1 in specific software and virtualization scenarios
  • Consistency in real-world performance with a narrow range of benchmark score variations

What we don't like about Intel Core i5-13500H

  • Tendency to run hot and experience thermal throttling under sustained high loads, especially in thin laptop chassis
  • Lackluster battery life compared to ultra-low voltage (U-series) processors or ARM-based competitors
  • Gaming performance can be underwhelming for the price when compared to AMD's Ryzen counterparts or higher-tier Intel 'K' models
  • Limited overclocking potential due to the locked multiplier
  • Integrated graphics (80 EUs) are less powerful than those found in some i7 or Ryzen 7 equivalents

Verdict

The Intel Core i5-13500H is a 13th Gen Raptor Lake-H mobile processor featuring a hybrid architecture of 12 cores (4 Performance and 8 Efficient) and 16 threads, with a max turbo frequency of 4.7 GHz and 18 MB of Smart Cache. Main characteristics include a 45W base TDP (scalable to 115W turbo power), support for high-speed DDR5-5200 and LPDDR5x-6400 memory, and integrated Intel Iris Xe graphics with 80 execution units. Key pros are its strong multi-core performance for productivity, excellent media encoding capabilities via its dual Quick Sync engines, and modern connectivity with PCIe 5.0 and Thunderbolt 4 support. Main cons include significant power consumption under heavy loads that can limit battery life in laptops and a lack of an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

Compare Intel Core i5-13500H with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i5-13500H and other processors

No results found