Intel Core 5 120 vs Intel Core i9-14901E Comparison

# Intel Core 5 120 vs Intel Core i9-14901E

The Intel Core 5 120 and Intel Core i9-14901E are both desktop processors on Intel Socket 1700, sharing the Raptor Lake architecture and a 10 nm process node, yet they occupy distinct positions in the performance hierarchy. The recorded data shows a sweeping victory for the Core i9-14901E across all 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, with the Core 5 120 failing to secure a single win. The Core i9-14901E achieves an average benchmark score of 37911 against 25362 for the Core 5 120, placing the i9 in the 86th percentile of all CPUs versus the 77th percentile for the Core 5 120. This represents a roughly 49% advantage in aggregate scoring, though the per-test deltas vary considerably from 17.3% to 59.3%.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results indicate a complete sweep for the Intel Core i9-14901E, winning all 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The Core 5 120 has no recorded wins in any test category, whether single-threaded, multi-threaded, or specialized workloads. This is not a case of one chip excelling in certain tasks while the other dominates elsewhere; the i9-14901E leads in every measurable dimension.

The closest margins appear in extended instruction handling and single-thread performance. The Core i9-14901E leads by 17.3% in Passmark extended instructions and by 17.4% in Passmark single-thread tests, suggesting that the per-core advantage, while still decisive, is less pronounced than in other workloads. The largest gaps emerge in prime number finding, where the i9-14901E leads by 59.3%, and physics calculations, where the lead expands to 56.2%. These results point to the i9's superior core count and higher clock ceilings providing outsized benefits in integer-heavy and physics-based computations.

For users examining the use-case split, the data shows the Core 5 120 is positioned as a capable mainstream desktop chip, while the Core i9-14901E functions as a high-end performer. The Core 5 120's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D and Intel Core i5-13400F, with delta percentages of 0% and 0.3% respectively, indicating it sits in a competitive mid-range bracket. Conversely, the i9-14901E trades blows with the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and AMD Ryzen 7 9700X, with deltas of 0% and -0.1%, placing it in flagship territory.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R codename, and are fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process. The die sizes differ substantially: the Core 5 120 measures 163 mm² while the Core i9-14901E expands to 257 mm², reflecting the additional silicon dedicated to more cores, cache, and integrated graphics resources.

The core configurations diverge significantly. The Core 5 120 provides 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core i9-14901E doubles the physical core count to 8 but doubles threads to 16. Both use a per-core L1 cache of 80 KB, but the L2 cache differs: 1.25 MB per core on the Core 5 120 versus 2 MB per core on the i9-14901E. The L3 cache shows the most dramatic difference, with 18 MB shared on the Core 5 120 versus 36 MB shared on the i9-14901E, double the capacity.

Clock speeds also separate the two. The Core 5 120 runs at a 2.50 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock, while the Core i9-14901E operates at 2.80 GHz base and 5.60 GHz boost. Both carry a 65 W TDP, which is notable given the i9's larger die and higher clocks. The integrated graphics differ as well: UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 120 versus UHD Graphics 770 on the i9-14901E. Memory support is identical, with DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, and both provide PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. ECC memory support is exclusive to the Core i9-14901E, while the Core 5 120 lacks this feature. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite reveals consistent 29% deficits for the Core 5 120. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core 5 120 scores 1840 against 2595 for the i9-14901E, a delta of -29.1%. Single-core R15 shows 259 versus 366, also -29.2%. R20 multicore delivers 7667 versus 10816 (-29.1%), and R20 single-core is 1082 versus 1526 (-29.1%). R23 multicore follows the pattern: 18255 versus 25753 (-29.1%), and R23 single-core is 2577 versus 3635 (-29.1%). These consistent percentages indicate the i9's advantage stems from its additional two cores and 16 threads, plus higher boost clocks, rather than any architectural efficiency difference.

The Passmark suite shows wider variations. Data compression yields 219535 for the Core 5 120 versus 288777 for the i9-14901E, a 24% gap. Data encryption is more lopsided: 11131 versus 18571, a 40.1% deficit. Extended instructions show a narrower 17.3% gap (14264 versus 17249), while find prime numbers reveals the largest disparity at 59.3% (77 versus 189). Floating point math scores 45383 versus 81089, a 44% difference, and integer math is 60462 versus 112736, a 46.4% gap. Multithread performance shows 18597 versus 30298 (-38.6%), physics is 1333 versus 3041 (-56.2%), and random string sorting is 21499 versus 39138 (-45.1%). Single-thread tests record 3595 versus 4354, a 17.4% advantage for the i9.

The data indicates the i9's advantage grows most in workloads that scale with core count, cache capacity, or both. Prime number finding and physics rely heavily on integer throughput and memory hierarchy, where the i9's 36 MB L3 and 2 MB per-core L2 provide substantial headroom. The single-thread gap of 17.4% aligns with the 1.1 GHz boost clock difference.

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the Intel Core i9-14901E as the unequivocally stronger processor across every benchmark category. Its 86th percentile standing, 37911 average score, and 8-core/16-thread configuration deliver between 17.3% and 59.3% higher scores than the Core 5 120 depending on workload. The Core 5 120, with its 6 cores, 12 threads, and 18 MB L3 cache, achieves a 77th percentile and 25362 average score, placing it in the same performance band as the AMD Ryzen 5 5600X3D and Intel Core i5-13400F.

For workloads requiring maximum multi-threaded throughput, high-frequency single-core responsiveness, or substantial cache capacity, the i9-14901E is the clear choice. The Core 5 120 remains a functional desktop processor for mainstream tasks, but the data shows no scenario where it outperforms the i9-14901E. Users requiring ECC memory support will also need the i9, as this feature is absent on the Core 5 120. The i9's larger die and double L3 cache, combined with higher clocks, justify its performance lead despite the identical 65 W TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the i9-14901E?

A: The i9-14901E has 36 MB shared L3 cache, exactly double the 18 MB shared L3 cache on the Core 5 120.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The Core i9-14901E boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the Core 5 120 boosts to 4.50 GHz, a 1.10 GHz advantage for the i9.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory support is available only on the Intel Core i9-14901E; the Intel Core 5 120 does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which chip has the better integrated graphics?

A: The i9-14901E uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core 5 120 uses UHD Graphics 730.

Q: What is the average benchmark score gap between the two?

A: The Core i9-14901E averages 37911 across benchmarks, compared to 25362 for the Core 5 120, a difference of 12549 points.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 120 | Intel Core i9-14901E |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 257 mm² |

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

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | UHD Graphics 770 |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2025-07-30 | 2024-06-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $211 | Not available |

| Percentile | 77 | 86 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 25362 | 37911 |