Intel Core 3 305 vs Intel Core 5 120HL Comparison

The Verdict

The data shows two distinctly positioned Intel processors. The Intel Core 3 305 is a mobile-focused, 6-core, 6-thread part built on Intel's 3 nm process with Wildcat Lake architecture. It delivers a measured average benchmark score of 18302, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 120HL is a desktop part with 12 cores and 16 threads on Raptor Lake-PS architecture, built on a 10 nm node, and sits in the 50th percentile.

For users who need single-thread responsiveness and modern efficiency in a mobile form factor, the Core 3 305 is the clear choice from the recorded data. Its single-core Cinebench R23 score of 1852 and PassMark single-thread score of 3977 indicate strong per-core performance. The Core 5 120HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its performance profile cannot be quantified here; its percentile rank of 50 versus the Core 3 305's 72 suggests the Core 3 305 holds the overall position advantage based on aggregate data.

The Core 5 120HL should be selected when the workload demands more physical cores and threads: 12 cores and 16 threads versus 6 cores and 6 threads, with a larger 18 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory support. The Core 3 305 should be selected when platform efficiency, a smaller process node, and a newer architecture matter more, as indicated by its 3 nm node and Wildcat Lake codename.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core 3 305 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) generation. It is fabricated on a 3 nm process node at Intel. The Core 5 120HL uses Raptor Lake-PS architecture, belongs to the Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS) generation, and is built on a 10 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading is present. The Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, indicating 4 of its cores provide additional threads for a total of 16. The Core 3 305's cache structure includes 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core 5 120HL lists L1 as 80 KB per core, L2 as 2 MB per core, and 18 MB of shared L3, which scales with its larger core count.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 305 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and a measured memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core 5 120HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel memory bus; no memory bandwidth figure is recorded for it. The Core 3 305's integrated graphics is Intel Xe3 Graphics with 1 Xe unit, while the Core 5 120HL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units.

PCIe connectivity is also different: the Core 3 305 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), and the Core 5 120HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Both use different sockets: the Core 3 305 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Core 5 120HL uses Intel Socket 1700. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table in the database is empty, and the Core 5 120HL has no individual benchmark scores recorded. The comparison therefore relies on the Core 3 305's measured results and the aggregate percentile positions.

The Core 3 305's Cinebench R23 multicore score is 13123, and its single-core score is 1852. In Cinebench R20, it scores 5511 multicore and 777 single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 1322 multicore and 186 single-core. These results show a multicore-to-single-core ratio that is typical of a 6-thread part with high boost capability, given its 4.30 GHz boost clock.

PassMark results for the Core 3 305 show a multithread score of 15439 and a single-thread score of 3977. Its integer math score is 32295, floating point math is 42284, and extended instructions score is 13543. Data compression scores 146857, data encryption scores 11019, and random string sorting scores 17623. Physics processing scores 1233, and prime number finding scores 115.

The Core 5 120HL has no recorded scores for any of these tests, so no direct numerical wins can be established. The nearest rivals for the Core 3 305 provide context for its standing: the Intel Core i3-14100 has an average score of 18318, which is 0.1% higher than the Core 3 305's 18302 average. The Intel Core 5 330 scores 18345, 0.2% higher. The Intel Core 7 360 scores 18374, 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 5 2600E scores 18230, which is 0.4% lower than the Core 3 305. These deltas place the Core 3 305 within a narrow band of roughly 0.4% of four comparable processors.

Specification Differences

The following specification fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 6 (Core 3 305) versus 12 (Core 5 120HL)
• Threads: 6 versus 16
• Base clock: 1.50 GHz versus 2.60 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.30 GHz versus 4.70 GHz
• TDP: 15 W versus 45 W
• Socket: Intel BGA 1516 versus Intel Socket 1700
• Codename: Wildcat Lake versus Raptor Lake-PS
• Generation: Core 3 (Wildcat Lake) versus Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS)
• Process node: 3 nm versus 10 nm
• L1 cache: 192 KB total versus 80 KB per core
• L2 cache: 2.5 MB versus 2 MB per core
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared versus 18 MB shared
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X versus DDR4, DDR5
• Memory bus: single-channel versus dual-channel
• Memory bandwidth: 59.7 GB/s versus not recorded
• PCIe: Gen 4, 6 lanes versus Gen 4, 8 lanes
• Integrated graphics: Intel Xe3 Graphics (1 Xe) versus Iris Xe Graphics 80EU
• Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop
• Release date: 2026-04-15 versus 2024-04-07
• Part number: SAE3L versus SRPFR
• Percentile vs all CPUs: 72 versus 50
• Average benchmark score: 18302 versus 0 (no data)

The launch MSRP for the Core 3 305 is $309. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 120HL is $279.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 3 305 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Core 3 305 is built on a 3 nm node, while the Core 5 120HL is built on a 10 nm node. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 5 120HL has a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, which is higher than the Core 3 305's boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Core 5 120HL also has a higher base clock at 2.60 GHz versus 1.50 GHz.

Q: How does the Core 3 305 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core 3 305 has an average benchmark score of 18302. The Intel Core i3-14100 is 0.1% higher at 18318, the Intel Core 5 330 is 0.2% higher at 18345, the Intel Core 7 360 is 0.4% higher at 18374, and the AMD Ryzen 5 2600E is 0.4% lower at 18230.

Q: Which processor supports dual-channel memory?

A: The Core 5 120HL supports dual-channel memory and accepts both DDR4 and DDR5. The Core 3 305 uses a single-channel memory bus and supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each?

A: The Core 3 305 ranks in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 120HL ranks in the 50th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 3 305 wins on efficiency metrics. Its 15 W TDP is one third of the Core 5 120HL's 45 W TDP, making it suited for mobile platforms given its Mobile market segment and BGA 1516 socket. Its 3 nm process node indicates a newer manufacturing technology. It also has a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s and a higher percentile rank at 72.

The Core 5 120HL wins on core count and thread count, offering exactly double the cores and nearly triple the threads. Its 18 MB shared L3 cache triples the 6 MB shared L3 of the Core 3 305. It provides a higher base clock (2.60 GHz) and higher boost clock (4.70 GHz), a dual-channel memory bus, support for DDR4 in addition to DDR5, more PCIe lanes (8 versus 6), and a desktop socket (Socket 1700) with a Desktop market segment. Its integrated graphics, Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, has 80 execution units compared to the Core 3 305's single Xe unit in Intel Xe3 Graphics.

For workloads that depend on many parallel threads, large shared cache, and memory bandwidth from dual channels, the Core 5 120HL is the indicated choice. For workloads that favor per-core responsiveness, lower power draw, and a more advanced process node, the Core 3 305 is the indicated choice based on the recorded data. The Core 3 305 has a higher percentile position (72nd versus 50th), which reflects its overall standing in the database despite its smaller core configuration.