Intel Core 5 120 vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core 5 120, which wins 14 of the 17 recorded tests. The Intel Core 5 315 takes only 3 wins, but those wins reveal a distinct performance profile. The average benchmark score for the Core 5 120 sits at 25362, while the Core 5 315 averages 18188, a gap of roughly 39.5% in favor of the desktop part.

The largest margins appear in the Cinebench suite. Across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the Core 5 120 leads by a consistent 40.6% to 40.8% in both single-core and multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 120 scores 18255 against 12981 for the Core 5 315. The single-core R23 result shows 2577 versus 1832. These consistent deltas across all three Cinebench versions suggest a fundamental throughput advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark integer math produces the single largest delta in the entire comparison. The Core 5 120 scores 60462, while the Core 5 315 manages 31690, a 90.8% advantage for the desktop chip. Data compression also favors the Core 5 120 heavily: 219535 versus 146143, a 50.2% lead. The multithread PassMark test shows a 21.8% gap (18597 against 15272), and random string sorting shows 22.5% (21499 versus 17551).

The Core 5 315 wins the PassMark single-thread test by 10.6%, scoring 4021 against 3595 for the Core 5 120. It also wins the find prime numbers test by 31.2% (112 versus 77). The encryption test is effectively a tie: 11131 versus 11119, a 0.1% margin that falls within noise. The Core 5 120 wins extended instructions by 8.5% (14264 versus 13143), floating point math by 6.9% (45383 versus 42441), and physics by 14.6% (1333 versus 1163).

The percentile rankings place the Core 5 120 at 77 (percentileVsAllCpus) and the Core 5 315 at 72. The nearest rivals for the Core 5 120 include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D at an average score of 25365 (0% delta), the Intel Core i7-11700KF at 25423 (-0.2%), the Intel Core i5-13400F at 25292 (0.3%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840U at 25432 (-0.3%). For the Core 5 315, the nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18189 (0%), the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 (0%), the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18177 (0.1%), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 18176 (0.1%).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different design lineages. The Intel Core 5 120 uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, with the codename Raptor Lake-R and a die size of 163 mm². It fits the Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop market segment. The Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm process node, fits the Intel BGA 1516 socket, and targets the mobile segment. The die size for the Core 5 315 is not recorded in the database.

Core counts match at 6 cores each, but thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 5 120 supports 12 threads, meaning each core handles two threads. The Core 5 315 supports only 6 threads, one per core, with no simultaneous multithreading. This explains much of the multi-core performance gap despite identical core counts.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. The Core 5 120 provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 315 lists 192 KB total L1, 2.5 MB total L2, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The L3 deficit is particularly notable: 18 MB versus 6 MB, a threefold difference that impacts data-heavy workloads.

Clock speeds follow the expected desktop-versus-mobile pattern. The Core 5 120 runs at 2.50 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The Core 5 315 runs at 1.50 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. The boost clocks are close, but the mobile chip operates at a much lower base frequency, likely constrained by thermal and power limits.

Power envelopes confirm the design intent. The Core 5 120 has a TDP of 65, while the Core 5 315 draws only 15. The mobile part consumes far less power, which aligns with its BGA socket and laptop positioning. The Core 5 315 supports single-channel memory with DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core 5 120 supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5, with no bandwidth figure recorded.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Core 5 120 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics also differ: the Core 5 120 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Both parts have locked multipliers and no ECC memory support.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 120 dominates in multi-threaded, compute-heavy workloads. Its 12 threads versus 6 threads give it a structural advantage in any parallel workload. The Cinebench multi-core results, PassMark multithread, integer math, data compression, and random string sorting all favor the desktop part by substantial margins. Users running video rendering, code compilation, scientific simulations, or database operations would see the Core 5 120 finish these tasks significantly faster.

The Core 5 315 wins in two specific PassMark tests: single-thread performance and prime number finding. The single-thread win (4021 versus 3595) suggests that for lightly-threaded, latency-sensitive applications, the mobile chip delivers better per-core responsiveness. The prime number test (112 versus 77) indicates stronger integer throughput on a single core under certain algorithmic patterns. These wins matter for applications that cannot use multiple threads effectively, such as some legacy software or latency-critical interactive workloads.

The encryption test is a statistical tie, meaning neither chip has a meaningful advantage in cryptographic operations. The Core 5 120 wins extended instructions and floating point math, but with smaller margins of 8.5% and 6.9% respectively. The physics test also goes to the Core 5 120 at 14.6% ahead.

The release dates differ notably: the Core 5 120 launched on 2025-07-30, while the Core 5 315 launched later on 2026-04-15. The production status for both is Active. The launch MSRP for the Core 5 120 is $211, and for the Core 5 315 it is $340.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 5 120 wins every multi-core benchmark recorded. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 18255 versus 12981, a 40.6% lead. PassMark multithread shows 18597 versus 15272, a 21.8% advantage.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 have any advantages?

A: The Core 5 315 wins the PassMark single-thread test by 10.6% (4021 versus 3595) and the find prime numbers test by 31.2% (112 versus 77). It also uses a 3 nm process node versus 10 nm for the Core 5 120.

Q: Why does the Core 5 120 win so many tests despite similar core counts?

A: The Core 5 120 supports 12 threads versus 6 for the Core 5 315, doubling the thread count. It also has 18 MB of L3 cache versus 6 MB, and runs at a higher base clock of 2.50 GHz versus 1.50 GHz.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Core 5 120 matches the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D with a 0% delta (25362 versus 25365), sits 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i5-13400F, and 0.2% behind the Intel Core i7-11700KF. The Core 5 315 matches the AMD EPYC 9274F at 0% delta and sits 0.1% above both the Intel Core i7-1365U and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The Core 5 120 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a single-channel memory bus and a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Which chip has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core 5 120 uses UHD Graphics 730. The database records no benchmark scores for either integrated GPU.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 120 | Intel Core 5 315 |

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

| Threads | 12 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 65 | 15 |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 4, 6 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2025-07-30 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $211 | $340 |

| Part Number | SA35V | SAEFC |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Not recorded |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split by use case. The Intel Core 5 120 is the stronger processor for almost every measured workload. Its 14 wins out of 17 head-to-head tests, combined with a 77th percentile ranking across all CPUs, make it the obvious choice for desktop users who need multi-threaded performance. The 40.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and the 90.8% lead in integer math indicate that rendering, compilation, and general productivity tasks will run substantially faster on this chip. Its 65 TDP and socket 1700 design fit a traditional desktop build, and the dual-channel memory support with both DDR4 and DDR5 provides flexibility.

The Intel Core 5 315 serves a different purpose. Its 15 TDP, BGA socket, and mobile market segment target laptops and compact systems where power efficiency takes priority. The 3 nm process node represents a significant manufacturing advantage, and the single-thread win (4021 versus 3595) shows that per-core performance remains competitive. The 6 MB L3 cache and single-channel memory bus limit its performance in data-heavy tasks, but for light workloads and battery-conscious applications, it delivers adequate results. The 72nd percentile ranking places it slightly below the Core 5 120 in the overall CPU landscape.

The average benchmark scores tell the story: 25362 for the Core 5 120 versus 18188 for the Core 5 315. The nearest rival comparisons confirm that the Core 5 120 competes with the Ryzen 5 5600X3D and Core i5-13400F, while the Core 5 315 aligns with the Core i7-9700 and Ryzen 7 5700U. Users requiring maximum performance on desktop should select the Core 5 120. Users prioritizing mobility and power efficiency should select the Core 5 315, accepting the multi-core tradeoffs documented in the benchmark data.