Core i9-13900H vs Core i5-2537M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-2537M
2011
2 cores / 4 threads, 17 Watt
0.79
Core i9-13900H
2023
14 cores / 20 threads, 45 Watt
18.74
+2272%

i9-13900H outperforms i5-2537M by a whopping 2272% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2531287
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i5Intel Raptor Lake-H
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Raptor Lake-H
Release date3 January 2011 (13 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$250no data
Current price$260 (1x MSRP)no data

Detailed specifications

Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)14 (Tetradeca-Core)
Threads420
Base clock speed1.4 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz5.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB1.2 MB
L2 cache512 KB11.5 MB
L3 cache3 MB24 MB
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size149 mm2257 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors624 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketBGA1023BGA1744
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++
vPro++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSXno data+

Security technologies

Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-d++
VT-x++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 3000Intel Iris Xe Graphics G7 96EUs

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanes168

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i5-2537M 0.79
i9-13900H 18.74
+2272%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 2272% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

i5-2537M 1223
i9-13900H 28993
+2271%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 2271% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i5-2537M 2814
i9-13900H 9630
+242%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 242% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i5-2537M 5903
i9-13900H 56403
+855%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 855% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i5-2537M 2400
i9-13900H 15120
+530%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 530% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

i5-2537M 24.9
i9-13900H 3.14
+693%

Core i5-2537M outperforms Core i9-13900H by 693% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

i5-2537M 2
i9-13900H 30
+1675%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 1675% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

i5-2537M 0.9
i9-13900H 3
+233%

Core i9-13900H outperforms Core i5-2537M by 233% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 18.74
Integrated graphics card 0.66 9.43
Recency 3 January 2011 4 January 2023
Physical cores 2 14
Threads 4 20
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 45 Watt

i5-2537M has 164.7% lower power consumption.

i9-13900H, on the other hand, has a 2272.2% higher aggregate performance score, 1328.8% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 12 years, 600% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 220% more advanced lithography process.

The Core i9-13900H is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-2537M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-2537M and Core i9-13900H, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i5-2537M
Core i5-2537M
Intel Core i9-13900H
Core i9-13900H

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 7 votes

Rate Core i5-2537M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 449 votes

Rate Core i9-13900H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-2537M or Core i9-13900H, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.