Core i5-13500 ES CPU Beats Core i5-12500 By Over 50 Percent In Early Multi-Threaded Benchmarks

Alder Lake
(Image credit: Intel)

The Core i5-13500 poses to be one of the best CPUs, according to early benchmarks. A BiliBili content creator recently posted a video showcasing an engineering sample (opens in new tab) of Intel's upcoming mid-range Core i5-13500 Raptor Lake processor and what it can do in Cinebench R23 and CPU-Z. The performance characteristics of the new CPU are impressive, with the chip boasting a whopping 56% multi-threaded performance advantage over its Core i5-12400 Alder Lake predecessor, thanks to the inclusion of eight additional efficiency cores on the Raptor Lake chip.

According to the Bilibili video, the Core i5-13500 engineering sample features a single-core turbo frequency of 4.8 GHz or 4.9 GHz - depending on the monitoring software shown, and an all-core frequency of 4.4 GHz. The efficiency cores peak at 3.4 GHz, with all cores going down to 3.3 GHz.

The most significant upgrade on the Core i5-13500 could be its core count, which reportedly features the same 6 P-core and 8 E-core combinations as the higher-up Core i5-13600K. It is a massive upgrade from Intel's Alder Lake predecessor, the Core i5-12500, which lacked efficiency cores. However, compared to the Core i5-12600K, the Core i5-13500 still has a core count advantage with two more E-cores.

We see this massive boost in core count clearly in Cinebench R23, where the chip in the Bilibili video hits a multi-threaded score of 19,891 points. It represents a whopping 56% performance improvement for the Core i5-13500 compared to the Core i5-12500, which scores 12,678 points in the same benchmark, according to Tech Notice (opens in new tab).

In CPU-Z's benchmark, the results are even more impressive, with the Core i5-13500 pulling out a score of 8,222 points in the multi-threaded benchmark, and is 61% faster than the official Core i5-12500 multi-threaded CPU-Z score of 5,108 points.

The single-threaded results aren't very imposing, with the Core i5-13500 pulling out a 9% lead over the Core i5-12500 in Cinebench R23, with a score of 1,901 vs. Tech Notice's score of 1,736 for the Core i5-12500. Unfortunately, we couldn't get a CPU-Z single-threaded result since the video's image quality was too blurry to make out any detail.

Nonetheless, a 9% lead is not bad for an engineering sample since these chips are usually lower clocked than the production models. As a result, we might see noticeably higher single-threaded performance and clock speeds, on the full production models, compared to what we are seeing today.

But, the most impressive results from the Core i5-13500 undoubtedly come from the multi-core results. Intel's decision to add a full eight E-cores to its budget-end Core i5-13500 is providing Intel's mid-range offering a serious performance jump over its Alder Lake predecessor. However, whether the Core i5-13500 offers a tremendous leap in gaming performance remains to be seen.

Aaron Klotz
Freelance News Writer

Aaron Klotz is a freelance writer for Tom’s Hardware US, covering news topics related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.

  • Metal Messiah.
    The MT scores/results indeed look quite promising for an ES2 chip sample.

    Also, the fact that users will be able to have the chip run on any LGA 1700 socketed motherboard with both DDR5 & DDR4 support means that it will become one of the most popular gaming budget chips, and a very competitive SKU in the sub-$250 US price range.

    Unlike the AMD AM5 platform, which only supports DDR5, Intel's Raptor lake chips seems to be more competitive, and offer flexible choice when it comes to upgrade. Not to mention the choice of a more affordable Intel B760 motherboard as well.
    Reply
  • setx
    And where is the "flexible choice when it comes to upgrade" in the dead end that LGA 1700 is? There is no future for the platform and the next generation will change the socket again.
    Reply
  • zoridon
    A system built for gaming off the LGA 1700 platform will last a minimum of 5 years with the only upgrade needed is a GPU. I have been building computers for gaming and business for over 25 years and by the time the CPU and connections need an upgrade I'm well past 5 years and usually closer to 7 or even 8 years. In the meantime I may have changed my GPU 2 or 3 times. After that much time you will want something totally new anyway with the newest PCIe express etc.. for example historically moving to USB 1 then 2 then 3 thane type c, or moving from DDR 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 and now 5. PCIE express you should know the cadence by now. 6 P core with 8 e cores will suffice for many years to come. If your worried about that then get the 8 p and 8 e core next step up model. Never build a system today without at least 32 gig of ram if used for gaming as well.
    Reply
  • Elusive Ruse
    Metal Messiah. said:
    The MT scores/results indeed look quite promising for an ES2 chip sample.

    Also, the fact that users will be able to have the chip run on any LGA 1700 socketed motherboard with both DDR5 & DDR4 support means that it will become one of the most popular gaming budget chips, and a very competitive SKU in the sub-$250 US price range.

    Unlike the AMD AM5 platform, which only supports DDR5, Intel's Raptor lake chips seems to be more competitive, and offer flexible choice when it comes to upgrade. Not to mention the choice of a more affordable Intel B760 motherboard as well.
    This reads like an Intel press release.
    Reply
  • digitalgriffin
    Elusive Ruse said:
    This reads like an Intel press release.

    Metal messiah has always been pragmatic and even handed IMHO. He is right in this case. And I'm not an Intel fanboi. Look at my systems in my sig. AMD just stepped into a pile of Doo Doo this round with the motherboard and memory cost. 7000 improvements would be largely wiped out by ddr4 I believe. It's basically Zen 3 shrunk down with some minor improvements in clock speed and scheduler.
    Reply
  • watzupken
    The increase in multithreaded performance is great, but almost mostly contributed from having no E-cores to having 8 E-cores. Having said that, I don't think this increase in performance comes free and will likely result in a higher i5 price tag. At the end of the day, it really depends on the use case of each buyer to determine the worth of the product. For gamers, the 8 E cores will not be of much benefit since games should use the P-cores exclusively. The E-cores may help to alleviate some of the background tasks running.
    Reply
  • TerryLaze
    watzupken said:
    The increase in multithreaded performance is great, but almost mostly contributed from having no E-cores to having 8 E-cores. Having said that, I don't think this increase in performance comes free and will likely result in a higher i5 price tag. At the end of the day, it really depends on the use case of each buyer to determine the worth of the product. For gamers, the 8 E cores will not be of much benefit since games should use the P-cores exclusively. The E-cores may help to alleviate some of the background tasks running.
    The xx500 went from a 6 core on the 9th to a 6/12 core on the 10th and kept the $192 price for the next few gens until the 12th gen where it was still 6/12 but went up in price to $222.
    It could increase but it could also not increase, there is precedent for both from intel.

    At the end of the day if prices do increase, but core count on lower CPUs also increases then people can just go with a lower CPU, if people don't need the extra MT of the i5 then better for the people because if the i3 is now as fast as an older i5 they will get off with paying much less.
    Reply
  • -Fran-
    Ah... Competition. Feels good.

    As predicted, no surprises there: the i5s were going to be a good deal.

    Let's see how AMD reacts when this launches, because the 7600X won't cut it for long at the same price due to the platform costs. Maybe AMD needs to hurry with the A620 boards.

    Regards.
    Reply
  • Elusive Ruse
    digitalgriffin said:
    Metal messiah has always been pragmatic and even handed IMHO. He is right in this case. And I'm not an Intel fanboi. Look at my systems in my sig. AMD just stepped into a pile of Doo Doo this round with the motherboard and memory cost. 7000 improvements would be largely wiped out by ddr4 I believe. It's basically Zen 3 shrunk down with some minor improvements in clock speed and scheduler.
    Is it performance we are bashing AMD for or costs? It cannot be both. Is it expensive to move to AM5? Yes, it is. Is it AMD's fault that MOBO manufacturers are charging premiums for early adopters? I disagree. Yet there are good value B650 boards out there so it's not out of the question
    Is DDR5 expensive? It used to be, it is not anymore, you can find good deals easily.
    Are Zen 4 CPUs too expensive? Not anymore.

    When it comes to performance, AMD and intel are neck-and-neck overall, with the caveat that 13600K at around 20 bucks cheaper than the 7700X offers a much better rounded performance. But all of this performance parity is possible only through pairing Intel chips with 6400 DDR5 RAMs.

    TL;DR, the cost to move to AM5 has been declining, and drastically at that recently, while the idea that Intel offers flexible upgrade path is only valid if you acknowledge that the performance will not come close to Zen4.
    Reply
  • JamesJones44
    Elusive Ruse said:
    Is it performance we are bashing AMD for or costs? It cannot be both. Is it expensive to move to AM5? Yes, it is. Is it AMD's fault that MOBO manufacturers are charging premiums for early adopters? I disagree. Yet there are good value B650 boards out there so it's not out of the question
    Is DDR5 expensive? It used to be, it is not anymore, you can find good deals easily.
    Are Zen 4 CPUs too expensive? Not anymore.

    When it comes to performance, AMD and intel are neck-and-neck overall, with the caveat that 13600K at around 20 bucks cheaper than the 7700X offers a much better rounded performance. But all of this performance parity is possible only through pairing Intel chips with 6400 DDR5 RAMs.

    TL;DR, the cost to move to AM5 has been declining, and drastically at that recently, while the idea that Intel offers flexible upgrade path is only valid if you acknowledge that the performance will not come close to Zen4.

    There are no broad strokes this generation. Your comment is trying to do that but it doesn't make sense. Every computer system should be bought with your use case in mind.

    Gaming: At the moment this is be best single core score, most games don't use more than a few cores so 8 e cores vs 8 p cores is largely irrelevant.
    Web browsing/Word Processing: Cheapest thing you can buy
    Workstation like workload: 7950x end of story.

    When you go through that list I would say gaming is a coin flip with the x3ds coming, web browsing is Intel (cheap) and workstation is AMD. All the rest of the arguments are just fanboy positioning.
    Reply