Core i9-13900HX vs Xeon W-10885M

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

Xeon W-10885M
2020
8 cores / 16 threads
10.16

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 184% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking692142
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
SeriesComet LakeIntel Raptor Lake-HX
Architecture codenameComet Lake-H (2020)Raptor Lake-HX
Release date13 May 2020 (3 years ago)4 January 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)24 (Tetracosa-Core)
Threads1632
Base clock speed2.4 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed5.1 GHz5.4 GHz
L1 cache512 KB80K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB2 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB36 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nmIntel 7 nm
Die sizeno data257 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX 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 configuration11
SocketFCBGA1440FCBGA1964
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt55 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMAno data+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Speed Shift++
Hyper-Threading Technology++
TSX-+
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring++
Flex Memory Access++
SIPP+no data
Turbo Boost Max 3.0++
StatusDiscontinuedLaunched

Security technologies

Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT++
EDB+no data
Secure Key++
Identity Protection+no data
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory size128 GB192 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth45.8 GB/s89.6 GB/s
ECC memory support+no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® UHD Graphics for 10th Gen Intel® ProcessorsIntel® UHD Graphics for 13th Gen Intel® Processors
Quick Sync Video++
Graphics max frequency1.25 GHz1.65 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported34
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@30Hz4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hz5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPort4096x2304@60Hz7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX1212.1
OpenGL4.54.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX.

PCIe version3.05.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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.

Xeon W-10885M 10.16
i9-13900HX 28.87
+184%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 184% based on our aggregated 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%

Xeon W-10885M 15711
i9-13900HX 44654
+184%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 184% 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%

Xeon W-10885M 7865
i9-13900HX 11700
+48.8%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 49% 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%

Xeon W-10885M 44583
i9-13900HX 79300
+77.9%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 78% 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%

Xeon W-10885M 13490
i9-13900HX 18037
+33.7%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 34% 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%

Xeon W-10885M 3.6
i9-13900HX 2.6
+38.5%

Xeon W-10885M outperforms Core i9-13900HX by 38% 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%

Xeon W-10885M 18
i9-13900HX 52
+187%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 187% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Xeon W-10885M 1640
i9-13900HX 4487
+174%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 174% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made 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 (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Xeon W-10885M 210
i9-13900HX 295
+40.5%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 40% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-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%

Xeon W-10885M 2.35
i9-13900HX 3.66
+55.7%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 56% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon W-10885M 10.3
i9-13900HX 17
+65%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 65% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon W-10885M 7180
i9-13900HX 12916
+79.9%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 80% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon W-10885M 237
i9-13900HX 388
+63.7%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 64% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Xeon W-10885M 100
i9-13900HX 218
+117%

Core i9-13900HX outperforms Xeon W-10885M by 117% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.16 28.87
Recency 13 May 2020 4 January 2023
Physical cores 8 24
Threads 16 32
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 55 Watt

The Core i9-13900HX is our recommended choice as it beats the Xeon W-10885M in performance tests.

Be aware that Xeon W-10885M is a mobile workstation processor while Core i9-13900HX is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Xeon W-10885M and Core i9-13900HX, 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 Xeon W-10885M
Xeon W-10885M
Intel Core i9-13900HX
Core i9-13900HX

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.


4.2 38 votes

Rate Xeon W-10885M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 369 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Xeon W-10885M or Core i9-13900HX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.