OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i9 13900H Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~ÂŁ550PassMark benchmark result:27211N. of physical cores:14CPU boost clock speed:5.4 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1744TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core i9 13900H Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

8.3

Overall score

Score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Score components

90%

8.3

Technical score

10%

?

User score

★Better than 91% of processors
8.3

Technical score

Technical score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Score components

60%

8.7

Performance

18%

7.7

Cache & Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.8

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated Graphics

★Better than 91% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ ÂŁ550

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 i9 13900H

Technical score
Technical score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 91% of models
Score components:

60%

8.7

Performance

18%

7.7

Cache & Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.8

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.1

Integrated Graphics

8.3
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▌ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i9 13900H has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
8.1/ 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
▌
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Č Better than 87% of models
Score components:

60%

8.3

Overall score

40%

7.6

Price

8.1
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
mobile
Processor type
mobile
▌ Worse than 44% of models
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 7.3% of processors and equal to that of 48.6% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1744
CPU socket
FCBGA1744
▌ Worse than 72% of models
This processor uses the FCBGA1744 CPU socket, which is older than that of 71.8% of processors and equal to that of 5% of processors.
Chipset
WM790, HM770
Chipset
WM790, HM770
▌ Worse than 60% of models
This processor supports WM790, HM770 chipsets, which is narrower compatibility than 59.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–Č Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
14
N. of physical cores
14
â–Č Better than 87% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 14 CPU cores, which is more than 87.1% of processors and equal to 4.3% of processors.
CPU threads
20
CPU threads
20
â–Č Better than 85% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 20 CPU threads, which is more than 85.3% of processors and equal to 4.5% of processors.
Threads per core
?
CPU boost clock speed
5.4 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
5.4 GHz
★ Better than 95% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.4 GHz which is higher than that of 95% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.6 GHz & 8x 1.9 GHz
CPU base clock speed
6x 2.6 GHz & 8x 1.9 GHz
â–Č Better than 87% of models
This processor has a base clock of 6x2.6 GHz & 8x1.9 GHz which is higher than that of 86.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Semiconductor size
10 nm
â–Č Better than 52% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 52.4% of processors and equal to that of 19.1% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
Foundry
Intel 7
â–Č Better than 66% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 66.2% of processors and equal to that of 14.9% of processors.
L3 cache
24 MB
L3 cache
24 MB
â–Č Better than 82% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 24 MB which is larger than that of 81.5% of processors and equal to that of 5.8% of processors.
L2 cache
11.5 MB
L2 cache
11.5 MB
â–Č Better than 82% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 11.5 MB which is larger than that of 82.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
L1 cache
1,248 KB
L1 cache
1,248 KB
★ Better than 90% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 1,248 KB which is larger than that of 89.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X
★ Better than 97% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X, which is newer than that of 97.3% of processors and equal to that of 2.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
â–Č Better than 84% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 6,400 MHz, which is higher than that of 83.9% of processors and equal to 8.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-6400 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-6400 MHz
★ Better than 90% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-6400 MHz, which is higher than that of 90.2% of processors and equal to 2.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
96 GB
Maximum memory capacity
96 GB
â–Č Better than 56% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 96 GB of memory, which is more than 56% of processors and equal to 5.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–Č Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
Integrated GPU model
Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
â–Č Better than 81% of models
This processor uses the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 81.1% of processors and equal to that in 2.9% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
96
Integrated GPU execution units
96
★ Better than 95% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 96 GPU execution units, which is more than 95% of processors and equal to 4% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
▌ Worse than 58% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 58.1% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
▌ Worse than 63% of models
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 63.1% of processors and equal to 10.8% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
▌ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 40.1% of processors and equal to that of 11.4% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Base power (PL1)
45 W
▌ Worse than 49% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 39.9% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
115 W
Boost power (PL2)
115 W
▌ Worse than 71% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 115 W which is higher than that of 71.3% of processors and equal to that of 7.3% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
▌ Worse than 10% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 3.4% of processors and equal to that of 86.1% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
Configurable TDP
yes
â–Č Better than 47% of models
This processor supports configurable TDP. 47.3% of processors support configurable TDP.
cTDP: 35 W
Show more

Intel Core i9 13900H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.68x higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    12,962
    â–Č Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (12,962 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    12,962 vs 4,829
  • 2.57x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    27,211
    â–Č Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (27,211 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    27,211 vs 10,572.5
  • 8 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    14
    â–Č Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    14 vs 6
  • 25.6% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    5.4 GHz
    ★ Better than 95% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    5.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 78.4% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    2,624
    â–Č Better than 88% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,624 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,624 vs 1,471
  • 12 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    20
    â–Č Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 48.3% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,708
    â–Č Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,708 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,708 vs 2,500
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    28
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • 23.4% better value for money
    Intel Core i9 13900H has better value for money than the average processor (8.1 vs 6.6).
    8.1 vs 6.56
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
    ★ Better than 95% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Includes crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    This processor includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 3 years newer release date
    Release date
    2023
    â–Č Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    January 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • Supports HMP
    Uses HMP
    yes
    â–Č Better than 77% of models
    This processor supports HMP, the average processor does not. 22.7% of processors support HMP.
  • 2.68x higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    12,962
    â–Č Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (12,962 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    12,962 vs 4,829
  • 2.57x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    27,211
    â–Č Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (27,211 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    27,211 vs 10,572.5
  • 8 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    14
    â–Č Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    14 vs 6
  • 25.6% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    5.4 GHz
    ★ Better than 95% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    5.4 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 78.4% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    2,624
    â–Č Better than 88% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,624 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,624 vs 1,471
  • 12 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    20
    â–Č Better than 85% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (20 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    20 vs 8
  • 48.3% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,708
    â–Č Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,708 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,708 vs 2,500
  • 47.9% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    723
    â–Č Better than 84% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (723 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    723 vs 489
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    6 x 2.6 GHz & 8 x 1.9 GHz
    â–Č Better than 87% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x2.6 GHz & 8x1.9 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    6x2.6 GHz & 8x1.9 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 2 wider front-end design
    Front-end width
    6
    â–Č Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <2 – >7
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    P-core 6, E-core 6
    6 vs 4
  • Supports Turbo Core
    Turbo Core version
    3.0
    â–Č Better than 85% of models
    This processor supports Turbo Core, the average processor does not. 1.00% of processors support Turbo Core.
    Intel Turbo Boost Max Technology 3
    3.0 vs 2.0
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Raptor Lake
    â–Č Better than 72% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 4.6x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    11.5 MB
    â–Č Better than 82% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (11.5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    11.5 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 4x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    2 MB/core
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • Uses big.LITTLE design
    big.LITTLE Architecture
    yes
    â–Č Better than 80% of models
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, the average processor does not. 20.5% of processors use a big.LITTLE design.
  • 3.25x larger L1 cache
    L1 cache
    1,248 KB
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1248 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    1,248 KB vs 384 KB
  • 3x larger L3 cache
    L3 cache
    24 MB
    â–Č Better than 82% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    24 MB vs 8 MB
  • More advanced foundry
    Foundry
    Intel 7
    â–Č Better than 66% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 16.7% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    10 nm
    â–Č Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (10 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    10 nm vs 12 nm
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    28
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    PCIe version
    5.0
    â–Č Better than 84% of models
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5.0 vs 3.0
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4
  • 2.18x higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    6,400 MHz
    â–Č Better than 84% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6400 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    LPDDR5X-6400 MHz
    ★ Better than 90% of models
    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
    Maximum memory capacity
    96 GB
    â–Č Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    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
  • 4x more GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    96
    ★ Better than 95% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (96 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    96 vs 24
  • Better integrated GPU
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
    â–Č Better than 81% of models
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 1 more supported displays
    Maximum supported displays
    4
    â–Č Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <1 – >6
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 45.2% larger die size
    Die size
    257 mmÂČ
    ▌ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <99 mmÂČ â€“ >257 mmÂČ
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (257 mmÂČ vs 177 mmÂČ). The average processor has a die size of 177 mmÂČ.
    257 mmÂČ vs 177 mmÂČ
  • 91.7% higher boost power
    Boost power (PL2)
    115 W
    ▌ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
    115 W vs 60 W
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    AV1 (HW decode)
    ▌ Worse than 63% of models
    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)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • 2.2x more expensive
    Intel Core i9 13900H is more expensive than the average processor (ÂŁ550 vs ÂŁ250).
    ÂŁ550 vs ÂŁ250
  • 40% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    200.33
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (200.3 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    200.33 vs 334.1
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    PCIe bifurcation modes
    x8/x4/x4
    ▌ Worse than 77% of models
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1744
    ▌ Worse than 72% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP4
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
    ▌ Worse than 51% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 2.2x more expensive
    Intel Core i9 13900H is more expensive than the average processor (ÂŁ550 vs ÂŁ250).
    ÂŁ550 vs ÂŁ250
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1744
    ▌ Worse than 72% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP4
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
    ▌ Worse than 51% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 40% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    200.33
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (200.3 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    200.33 vs 334.1
  • 45.2% larger die size
    Die size
    257 mmÂČ
    ▌ Worse than 87% of models
    Market range: <99 mmÂČ â€“ >257 mmÂČ
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (257 mmÂČ vs 177 mmÂČ). The average processor has a die size of 177 mmÂČ.
    257 mmÂČ vs 177 mmÂČ
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    PCIe bifurcation modes
    x8/x4/x4
    ▌ Worse than 77% of models
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    AV1 (HW decode)
    ▌ Worse than 63% of models
    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)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • 91.7% higher boost power
    Boost power (PL2)
    115 W
    ▌ Worse than 71% of models
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (115 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
    115 W vs 60 W

Video reviews

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

Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

C
cpubenchmark.net
29/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-13900H - CPU PassMark Benchmarks
L
laptopmedia.com
07/06/2023
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-13700H vs Intel Core i9-13900H: Do you need to splurge for a Core i9?
L
laptopmedia.com
07/06/2023
Summary of the review
[Comparison] Intel Core i7-13700H vs Intel Core i9-13900H – Do you need to splurge for a Core i9?
O
openbenchmarking.org
Q1 2023
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-13900H Benchmarks, Linux Performance
L
laptopmedia.com
07/06/2023
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-13900H - LaptopMedia Benchmarks
H
hardware-helden.de
04/06/2023
Summary of the review
MIFCOM Gaming Laptop i9-13900H - RTX 4070 Review
(Translated)Show original
S
stadt-bremerhaven.de
22/06/2024
Summary of the review
Geekom GT13 Pro Review: Mini PC with Intel Core i9-13900H
(Translated)Show original
I
igorslab.de
08/11/2023
Summary of the review
Geekom Mini IT13 Mini PC Review – An i9-13900H with 20 Threads in the Smallest of Spaces
(Translated)Show original
T
techtest.org
07/11/2023
Summary of the review
Geekom IT13 Review: Intel Core i9-13900H in a super compact case—can it actually work?", "Geekom IT13 tested: Does an Intel Core i9-13900H make sense...
(Translated)Show original
C
cachem.fr
20/10/2023
Summary of the review
GEEKOM Mini IT13 Review (Intel Core i9-13900H)
(Translated)Show original
T
tomsguide.fr
08/01/2024
Summary of the review
Huawei Matebook D 16 2024 Review: A Large Productivity Laptop Boosted by the Core i9-13900H
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
23/10/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i9-13900H - Specs, Tests, and Benchmarks
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.nl
17/02/2023
Summary of the review
Asus ROG Zephyrus M16 GU604VY-NM042X Review
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i9 13900H

  • High core count (14 cores/20 threads) allows for excellent multitasking and professional workloads like video editing and 3D modeling.
  • Strong single-core performance with boost speeds up to 5.4 GHz, making it highly suitable for gaming.
  • Support for modern standards including DDR5 RAM, PCIe 5.0, and Thunderbolt 4 connectivity.
  • Features Intel Iris Xe integrated graphics with 96 execution units, providing decent visual performance even without a dedicated GPU.
  • Built-in AI acceleration (Intel DL Boost) enhances tasks like machine learning and image processing.

What we don't like about Intel Core i9 13900H

  • High power consumption under load, with peak power reaching up to 115W, which can significantly drain battery life.
  • Prone to thermal throttling in smaller laptop chassis or mini-PCs, often reaching temperatures up to 100°C.
  • Marginal performance gains over the more affordable i7-13700H, leading some users to question its value for money.
  • Frequent reports of loud fan noise as cooling systems struggle to manage the chip's heat output.
  • Heavily limited performance when running on battery power in many laptop implementations to conserve energy.

Verdict

The Intel Core i9-13900H is a high-end 13th Gen Raptor Lake mobile processor featuring 14 cores (6 Performance and 8 Efficient) and 20 threads, with a max turbo frequency of 5.40 GHz and 24 MB of Intel Smart Cache. Its primary strengths include exceptional single and multi-core performance for gaming and professional content creation, advanced support for DDR5-5200 memory, and modern connectivity like PCIe 5.0 and Thunderbolt 4. However, its high power consumption (up to 115W turbo) often leads to significant thermal throttling in thinner laptop chassis, and it lacks the unlocked multiplier for overclocking found in the i9-13900HK variant.

Compare Intel Core i9 13900H 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 i9 13900H and other processors

No results found