Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core 5 120HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a full benchmark suite for the Intel Core 3 201E, while the Intel Core 5 120HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the current dataset. This asymmetry limits direct score comparisons, but the available data for the Core 3 201E provides a clear performance profile against its nearest rivals.

The Core 3 201E delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12613 and a single-core score of 1780. Its Cinebench R20 results show 5297 multi-core and 747 single-core, while Cinebench R15 records 1271 multi-core and 179 single-core. These figures place the processor at the 73rd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

PassMark tests further characterize the Core 3 201E. It achieves 14839 in multi-threaded performance, 3482 in single-threaded performance, 43894 in integer math, 33260 in floating-point math, 164160 in data compression, and 8931 in data encryption. Extended instructions score 11035, prime number finding scores 57, physics scores 1141, and random string sorting scores 17783.

The nearest rivals for the Core 3 201E show tight competition. The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS holds an average benchmark score of 19047, essentially identical to the Core 3 201E's 19056 average. The Intel Core i5-12400F scores 19039, just 0.1 percent behind. The Intel Core i5-1335U and AMD EPYC 7773X both trail by 0.4 percent with scores of 18982 and 18979 respectively. This places the Core 3 201E in a crowded performance band where a fraction of a percent separates competitors.

The Core 5 120HL's absence of benchmark data means no head-to-head wins can be assigned to either processor. The Core 3 201E's recorded scores indicate a capable desktop processor, while the Core 5 120HL's performance remains unmeasured in the database.

FAQ

Q: Does the Core 3 201E have recorded benchmark scores?

A: Yes, the Core 3 201E has 17 recorded benchmark results across Cinebench R15, R20, R23, and PassMark tests, with an average benchmark score of 19056.

Q: Does the Core 5 120HL have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the Core 5 120HL has an empty benchmark array, no average score, and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each processor?

A: The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare between the two processors?

A: The Core 3 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz, which is higher than the Core 5 120HL's 4.70 GHz boost clock.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity for each processor?

A: The Core 3 201E has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 5 120HL has 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, the Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, but the Core 5 120HL does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the Intel Socket 1700 package and a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, but their underlying designs diverge significantly. The Core 3 201E belongs to the Bartlett Lake generation and carries the codename Bartlett Lake, while the Core 5 120HL is based on Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-PS. Intel lists the Core 5 120HL's architecture explicitly as Raptor Lake, whereas the Core 3 201E's architecture field remains unspecified in the database.

Core counts differ substantially: the Core 3 201E provides 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 5 120HL provides 12 cores and 16 threads. This indicates a hybrid core arrangement in the Core 5 120HL, consistent with Raptor Lake designs that combine performance and efficiency cores. The Core 3 201E's 4-core, 8-thread configuration suggests a uniform core layout.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. Both processors use 80 KB of L1 cache per core, but L2 cache differs: the Core 3 201E has 1.25 MB per core, while the Core 5 120HL has 2 MB per core. Shared L3 cache totals 12 MB on the Core 3 201E versus 18 MB on the Core 5 120HL.

Memory support is identical in type: both accept DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. However, the Core 3 201E records a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 5 120HL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. ECC memory support is exclusive to the Core 3 201E.

PCIe capabilities differ by generation and lane count. The Core 3 201E uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU-only lanes, whereas the Core 5 120HL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU-only lanes. This gives the Core 3 201E a substantial interface advantage for expansion and data transfer.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201E pairs with UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 5 120HL pairs with Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The Iris Xe solution represents a higher-tier integrated graphics implementation.

Clock speeds show a trade-off. The Core 3 201E runs at a 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.80 GHz boost, while the Core 5 120HL runs at a 2.60 GHz base clock and 4.70 GHz boost. The Core 3 201E holds the advantage in both base and boost frequencies, but the Core 5 120HL compensates with more cores and threads.

Power characteristics favor the Core 5 120HL in thermal design power, rated at 45 watts versus the Core 3 201E's 60 watts. This lower TDP comes despite the Core 5 120HL having three times the core count.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear choice based on measured performance versus specification-driven expectations. The Core 3 201E has verified benchmark scores placing it at the 73rd percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 19056. Its nearest rivals cluster within 0.4 percent, indicating solid mainstream performance for a 4-core processor.

The Core 5 120HL offers a specification sheet that suggests higher multi-core potential: 12 cores, 16 threads, 18 MB of shared L3 cache, and 2 MB of L2 per core. Its 45-watt TDP indicates efficiency relative to its core count. However, without any recorded benchmark results, the database cannot confirm how these specifications translate into actual performance.

For workloads that prioritize single-threaded responsiveness, the Core 3 201E's higher base and boost clocks, at 3.60 GHz and 4.80 GHz respectively, provide a measured advantage over the Core 5 120HL's 2.60 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost. The Core 3 201E also delivers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, doubling the lane count and advancing a generation over the Core 5 120HL's PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

For workloads that scale with core count, the Core 5 120HL's 12 cores and 16 threads versus the Core 3 201E's 4 cores and 8 threads suggests a potential advantage in heavily parallel tasks, but the absence of benchmark confirmation leaves this as an unverified projection.

The Core 3 201E's ECC memory support adds a reliability feature absent from the Core 5 120HL, which may matter for specific professional or server-like deployments. The Core 5 120HL's Iris Xe Graphics 80EU represents a more capable integrated graphics solution than the Core 3 201E's UHD Graphics 730, though neither processor targets gaming without a discrete GPU.

The Core 3 201E is the only processor in this comparison with verified performance data, making it the defensible choice for users who prioritize measured results. The Core 5 120HL remains a specification-based alternative whose real-world performance the database has not yet captured.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | Intel Core 5 120HL |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 45 W |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Generation | Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) | Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS) |

| Architecture | Not specified | Raptor Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not specified |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not specified |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | Active |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-04-07 |

| Part Number | SRVTR | SRPFR |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

The release dates show the Core 3 201E arriving later, in January 2025, while the Core 5 120HL shipped in April 2024. Both processors remain in active production. The Core 3 201E's die size is recorded at 163 mm², while the Core 5 120HL has no die size listed. The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory and provides a higher-tier PCIe interface, while the Core 5 120HL counters with more cores, more threads, larger caches, and a lower TDP.