Intel Core 5 120 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus dominates the Intel Core 5 120 across 16 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with the sole exception being a single-core Cinebench result. The aggregate scores confirm the gulf, as the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus averages 66,855 across all benchmark entries compared to 25,362 for the Core 5 120, placing the former in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs versus the 77th percentile for the latter.

The most extreme difference appears in the PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 against 77 for the Core 5 120, a 84.2% advantage. Data encryption shows a similar pattern: 42,144 versus 11,131, a 73.6% lead. Extended instructions follow with 44,565 against 14,264, a 68% margin, and random string sorting shows 69,090 versus 21,499, a 68.9% gap. Floating-point math delivers 162,692 versus 45,383, a 72.1% edge for the newer processor.

Multi-threaded workloads consistently favor the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Cinebench R15 multicore shows 4,640 versus 1,840, a 60.3% lead. Cinebench R20 multicore records 18,442 versus 7,667, a 58.4% margin. Cinebench R23 multicore delivers 30,867 versus 18,255, a 40.9% advantage. PassMark multithread scores 51,596 versus 18,597, a 64% edge, while the physics test shows 3,494 versus 1,333, a 61.8% lead.

Single-thread performance is closer but still favors the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus in most tests. PassMark single-thread records 4,757 versus 3,595, a 24.4% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 328 versus 259, a 21% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core delivers 2,603 versus 1,082, a 58.4% margin. The exception is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 5 120 scores 2,577 versus 2,261 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, a 14% win for the older chip.

Data compression shows 568,721 versus 219,535, a 61.4% lead for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Integer math scores 125,091 versus 60,462, a 51.7% advantage. The aggregate benchmark average of 66,855 versus 25,362 places the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus 163.6% ahead overall, a decisive margin that appears across nearly every workload category.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different Intel generations. The Core 5 120 uses Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-R codename, built on a 10 nm process by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake Refresh codename on a 3 nm process fabricated by TSMC. This process node difference is substantial: 3 nm versus 10 nm, and the transistor count reflects it, with the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus containing 17,800 million transistors versus no listed transistor count for the Core 5 120. Die size also differs, with the Core 5 120 at 163 mm² and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at 243 mm².

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads, indicating hyperthreading support. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, with no hyperthreading. This explains the multicore benchmark dominance of the newer chip, as it has three times the physical cores. Base clocks differ as well: 2.50 GHz for the Core 5 120 versus 4.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Boost clocks show 4.50 GHz versus 5.30 GHz.

Cache hierarchy favors the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus at every level. L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 cache is 18 MB shared versus 30 MB shared. The total cache capacity difference is significant for workloads that fit within the shared L3.

Memory support also differs. The Core 5 120 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus lists a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, a figure absent for the Core 5 120. ECC memory support is available on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus but not on the Core 5 120.

PCIe lanes differ: the Core 5 120 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ as well, with UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 5 120 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU on the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 5 120 versus Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 5 120 does not. Power specifications show a 65 W TDP for the Core 5 120 versus 125 W for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins in every benchmark category except one, so its strengths are broad and systematic. The largest margins appear in multi-threaded and parallel workloads. Data encryption shows a 73.6% lead, find prime numbers shows 84.2%, and floating-point math shows 72.1%. These results indicate the 18-core design excels when work can be distributed across many cores simultaneously. The PassMark multithread score of 51,596 versus 18,597, a 64% edge, further confirms this pattern. Cinebench multicore tests show consistent 40% to 60% advantages, with the R20 version delivering a 58.4% margin.

The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also wins in single-thread performance despite the one exception. PassMark single-thread shows a 24.4% lead, Cinebench R15 single-core shows 21%, and Cinebench R20 single-core shows 58.4%. These wins suggest the higher base clock of 4.20 GHz and boost clock of 5.30 GHz provide a per-core advantage in most single-threaded scenarios.

The Core 5 120 wins exactly one benchmark: Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 2,577 versus 2,261, a 14% margin. This result indicates that in this specific test, the Raptor Lake architecture with its 2.50 GHz base clock and 4.50 GHz boost clock delivers superior single-thread execution. The 6-core, 12-thread design with hyperthreading may contribute to this isolated win, as the workload may favor the older core design's scheduling behavior.

For integer math, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 125,091 versus 60,462, a 51.7% lead. Data compression shows 568,721 versus 219,535, a 61.4% edge. Extended instructions deliver 44,565 versus 14,264, a 68% advantage. Random string sorting shows 69,090 versus 21,499, a 68.9% lead. Physics testing records 3,494 versus 1,333, a 61.8% margin. Across all these workloads, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus consistently delivers between 1.5 and 6.3 times the performance of the Core 5 120.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus is the superior processor for nearly all workloads. Its 18 cores and 18 threads provide massive parallel throughput, and its higher clocks (4.20 GHz base, 5.30 GHz boost) deliver strong single-thread results. The 3 nm TSMC process with 17,800 million transistors and 243 mm² die size supports this performance, as does the larger cache hierarchy (192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, 30 MB shared L3). The 93rd percentile ranking versus the 77th percentile for the Core 5 120 confirms its overall standing.

The Core 5 120 retains one clear advantage: Cinebench R23 single-core performance, where it leads by 14%. This is a narrow but real win, and for workloads that specifically resemble that benchmark, the older chip may be preferable. However, the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus wins all other single-core tests, including PassMark single-thread by 24.4% and Cinebench R20 single-core by 58.4%, so the Core 5 120's advantage appears isolated.

Users prioritizing multi-threaded performance should select the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, as its multicore scores are 40.9% to 84.2% higher across all tested workloads. Users with workloads that specifically match Cinebench R23 single-core conditions might consider the Core 5 120, but they would sacrifice substantial performance in every other category. The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus also offers ECC memory support, an unlocked multiplier, and 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, features absent from the Core 5 120. The data supports the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus as the overall choice.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the single benchmark where the Intel Core 5 120 wins?

A: Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 5 120 scores 2,577 versus 2,261 for the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus, a 14% advantage.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The PassMark find prime numbers test, where the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 486 versus 77 for the Core 5 120, a 84.2% lead.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Core 5 120 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports only DDR5.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The Core 5 120 has a TDP of 65 W, and the Core Ultra 5 250K Plus has a TDP of 125 W.

Q: Which processor has ECC memory support?

A: The Core Ultra 5 250K Plus supports ECC memory; the Core 5 120 does not.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded specifications:

| Specification | Intel Core 5 120 | Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus |

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

| Cores | 6 | 18 |

| Threads | 12 | 18 |

| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 4.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-R | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not listed | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 243 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB (shared) | 30 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not listed | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Launch MSRP | $211 | $199 |