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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a split decision between the Intel Core 3 201E and the Intel Core 5 120U, with the Core 5 120U taking 9 wins to the Core 3 201E's 8. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The single largest victory belongs to the Intel Core 3 201E in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 12613 against the Core 5 120U's 6659, a commanding 89.4% advantage. This is the defining performance gap between the two processors. The Core 3 201E also leads decisively in Passmark physics with a 21.8% margin (1141 vs 937) and in Passmark extended instructions with an 18.7% edge (11035 vs 9299). Smaller wins for the Core 3 201E include Passmark find prime numbers at 7.5% (57 vs 53), Cinebench R23 single-core at 1.3% (1780 vs 1756.5), and Passmark single-thread at a marginal 0.1% (3482 vs 3479).

The Intel Core 5 120U counters with its own set of victories, led by Cinebench R15 single-core where it posts 245 against the Core 3 201E's 179, a 26.9% advantage. Passmark integer math shows the Core 5 120U ahead by 16% (52280 vs 43894), and Passmark data encryption shows a 14.6% lead (10453 vs 8931). The Core 5 120U also wins Passmark floating-point math by 7.7% (36026 vs 33260), Passmark random string sorting by 6.7% (19060 vs 17783), Passmark data compression by 1.4% (166432 vs 164160), Passmark multithread by 1.3% (15042 vs 14839), and Cinebench R20 multi-core by 1% (5349 vs 5297). Cinebench R20 single-core goes to the Core 5 120U by 1.1% (755 vs 747).

The data reveals a clear pattern: the Core 3 201E dominates heavily in long-form multi-core rendering and physics workloads, while the Core 5 120U excels in short-duration single-core tests and several integer-heavy Passmark workloads. The R23 multi-core result is particularly striking because it shows the Core 3 201E nearly doubling the Core 5 120U's score, a margin far larger than any other test in the comparison. Conversely, the R15 single-core result shows the Core 5 120U with a substantial 26.9% lead, indicating that the Core 5 120U's peak frequency advantage materializes most clearly in brief, lightly threaded bursts.

The average benchmark scores place the Core 3 201E at 19056 and the Core 5 120U at 17898, a difference of approximately 6.5%. Their percentile rankings against all CPUs are close: the Core 3 201E sits at the 73rd percentile, while the Core 5 120U sits at the 72nd. The nearest rivals for the Core 3 201E include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19047 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19039 (0.1% delta), the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982 (0.4% delta), and the AMD EPYC 7773X at 18979 (0.4% delta). For the Core 5 120U, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT at 17891 (0% delta), the Intel Core 5 221TE at 17860 (0.2% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 at 17994 (-0.5% delta), and the Intel Core 7 350 at 17779 (0.7% delta).

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge substantially in their physical and architectural configurations. The Intel Core 3 201E uses 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120U uses 10 cores and 12 threads. The Core 5 120U therefore has more than twice the core count, yet the Core 3 201E still manages to win the Cinebench R23 multi-core test by 89.4%, which indicates that the Core 3 201E's cores deliver significantly higher sustained throughput per core.

Clock speeds differ markedly. The Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 5 120U has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Core 5 120U's boost clock is 0.20 GHz higher, which explains its 26.9% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core. The Core 3 201E's base clock is 2.20 GHz higher, which contributes to its strong sustained multi-core showing despite having fewer cores.

Both processors use a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Core 3 201E is built on the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) generation, while the Core 5 120U uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-U codename and belongs to the Core 5 (Raptor Lake-U) generation. The Core 3 201E has a die size of 163 mm², while the Core 5 120U's die size is not recorded in the database.

Cache configurations are identical in structure: both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 3 201E's lower core count combined with the same per-core cache allocation means its total cache footprint is smaller, yet it still achieves the dominant multi-core result.

Power and platform targets differ substantially. The Core 3 201E is rated at 60 watts TDP and uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the Core 5 120U is rated at 15 watts TDP and uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket. This reflects their different market segments: the Core 3 201E is a desktop part, while the Core 5 120U is a mobile part. The 45-watt TDP gap is consistent with the Core 3 201E's ability to sustain high multi-core performance, as the Core 5 120U operates under a much tighter power envelope.

Memory support is similar: both support DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. The Core 3 201E records a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 5 120U's memory bandwidth is not recorded. The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 120U does not. PCIe capabilities differ: the Core 3 201E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 120U uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 5 120U uses Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The Core 3 201E launched on 2025-01-12 with a launch MSRP of $134, while the Core 5 120U launched on 2024-01-07 with no recorded launch MSRP. Both processors have locked multipliers and are currently marked as Active in production status. The part numbers are SRVTR for the Core 3 201E and SRM7P for the Core 5 120U.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 12613 against the Core 5 120U's 6659, an 89.4% advantage. It also leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core by 10.5% (1271 vs 1150.5) and in Passmark physics by 21.8% (1141 vs 937).

Q: Which processor performs better in single-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core 5 120U in short-duration tests. It leads Cinebench R15 single-core by 26.9% (245 vs 179) and Cinebench R20 single-core by 1.1% (755 vs 747). However, the Core 3 201E leads Cinebench R23 single-core by 1.3% (1780 vs 1756.5) and Passmark single-thread by 0.1% (3482 vs 3479).

Q: How do the core counts compare between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 5 120U has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having 6 fewer cores, the Core 3 201E wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test by 89.4%.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E is rated at 60 watts TDP, while the Intel Core 5 120U is rated at 15 watts TDP. The Core 3 201E uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the Core 5 120U uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core 5 120U has the higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz. The Core 3 201E has the higher base clock at 3.60 GHz, while the Core 5 120U's base clock is 1.40 GHz.

Q: How do the two processors compare in encryption and integer workloads?

A: The Intel Core 5 120U leads in Passmark data encryption by 14.6% (10453 vs 8931) and in Passmark integer math by 16% (52280 vs 43894). The Intel Core 3 201E leads in Passmark extended instructions by 18.7% (11035 vs 9299) and in Passmark find prime numbers by 7.5% (57 vs 53).

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates that the Intel Core 3 201E is the stronger choice for sustained multi-core rendering and physics workloads. Its 89.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core is the single largest performance gap in the entire comparison, and its 21.8% lead in Passmark physics reinforces this strength. The 60-watt TDP and desktop Socket 1700 platform allow it to sustain high clocks across all cores, which is reflected in its 12613 score versus the Core 5 120U's 6659 in the same test.

The Intel Core 5 120U is the better option for short-duration single-core bursts and integer-heavy workloads. Its 26.9% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core demonstrates its peak-frequency advantage, and its 16% lead in Passmark integer math plus 14.6% lead in Passmark data encryption show strengths in specific compute patterns. The 15-watt TDP and mobile BGA 1744 platform make it suitable for power-constrained environments.

The average benchmark score favors the Core 3 201E at 19056 versus 17898, a difference of approximately 6.5%. The percentile rankings are nearly identical at 73 versus 72. The Core 3 201E's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with a 0% delta, while the Core 5 120U's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT with a 0% delta.

For users requiring maximum sustained multi-core throughput in a desktop platform, the data supports the Core 3 201E. For users prioritizing single-core responsiveness and integer math in a low-power mobile platform, the data supports the Core 5 120U. The Core 3 201E also offers ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core 5 120U offers PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes and no ECC support.

Specification Differences

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

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

| Cores | 4 | 10 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-U |

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

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not recorded |

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

| 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 | Mobile |

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

| Launch MSRP | $134 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRVTR | SRM7P |