Intel Core 5 120 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 388H Comparison
Intel Core 5 120
Core Ultra X9 388H
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 5 120 vs Intel Core Ultra X9 388H
The Intel Core 5 120 and the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H represent two distinct Intel design philosophies. The Core 5 120 is a Raptor Lake desktop processor with a 65 W TDP and a 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra X9 388H is a Panther Lake mobile processor with a 25 W TDP and a 3 nm process. The benchmark data shows a decisive split: the Core Ultra X9 388H wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Core 5 120 manages a single victory in Cinebench R23 single-core. This page analyzes where each processor excels, the architectural foundations of that split, and the specific score differences.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H is the clear leader in multi-threaded and throughput-heavy workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 18911 against the Core 5 120's 18255, a 3.5% advantage. The gap widens dramatically in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Ultra X9 scores 13101 versus 7667, a 41.5% lead. The PassMark multi-thread test shows a similar story, with the Ultra X9 scoring 36811 against 18597, a 49.5% advantage.
The Ultra X9 also dominates most single-threaded tests. In Cinebench R15 single-core, it scores 309.5 against 259, a 16.3% lead. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 1849 against 1082, a 41.5% lead. The PassMark single-thread score is 4280 for the Ultra X9 versus 3595 for the Core 5 120, a 16% difference. The only exception is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 5 120 wins with 2577 against 2200.5, a 17.1% margin.
The Ultra X9's largest wins come in specialized workloads. In PassMark find prime numbers, it scores 358 versus 77, a 78.5% lead. In PassMark data encryption, it scores 28490 against 11131, a 60.9% lead. In PassMark floating point math, it scores 112550 against 45383, a 59.7% lead. These results indicate that the Ultra X9's architectural advantages translate directly into higher throughput for encryption, mathematical, and data-processing tasks.
Architecture Differences
The two processors are built on different nodes and architectures. The Core 5 120 uses Raptor Lake on a 10 nm process, with a die size of 163 mm². The Core Ultra X9 388H uses Panther Lake on a 3 nm process. This process difference is fundamental, as the 3 nm node allows for a higher transistor density and better power efficiency, which is critical for a mobile processor.
Core counts differ significantly. The Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra X9 388H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the Ultra X9 has no hyper-threading, but its physical core count provides a substantial multi-threading advantage. The cache hierarchy also differs. The Core 5 120 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, while the Ultra X9 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. Both share 18 MB of L3 cache.
Memory support is another differentiator. The Core 5 120 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus. The Ultra X9 supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. The Core 5 120 has a PCIe Gen 5 interface with 16 lanes, while the Ultra X9 has PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Core 5 120 using UHD Graphics 730 and the Ultra X9 using Arc B390.
Clock speeds show a trade-off. The Core 5 120 has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Ultra X9 has a lower base clock of 2.10 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The TDP reflects their different market segments: the Core 5 120 is a desktop processor with a 65 W TDP, while the Ultra X9 is a mobile processor with a 25 W TDP.
The release dates and sockets also differ. The Core 5 120 was released on 2025-07-30 and uses Intel Socket 1700. The Ultra X9 was released on 2026-01-04 and uses Intel BGA 2540. The Core 5 120 has a launch MSRP of $211, while the Ultra X9 has no recorded launch MSRP.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?
A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has an average benchmark score of 44466, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 5 120 has an average score of 25362, placing it in the 77th percentile.
Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?
A: The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H scores 18911, which is 3.5% higher than the Intel Core 5 120's score of 18255.
Q: Is there any test where the Intel Core 5 120 wins?
A: Yes, the Intel Core 5 120 wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 2577, which is 17.1% higher than the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H's score of 2200.5.
Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?
A: The Intel Core 5 120 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has 16 cores and 16 threads.
Q: What is the TDP of each processor?
A: The Intel Core 5 120 has a TDP of 65 W. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H has a TDP of 25 W.
Q: What memory types does each processor support?
A: The Intel Core 5 120 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra X9 388H supports LPDDR5X memory.
Specification Differences
The following table details the key specification differences between the two processors.
| Specification | Intel Core 5 120 | Intel Core Ultra X9 388H |
| :--- | :--- | :--- |
| Cores | 6 | 16 |
| Threads | 12 | 16 |
| Base Clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.10 GHz |
| Boost Clock | 4.50 GHz | 5.10 GHz |
| TDP | 65 W | 25 W |
| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |
| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Panther Lake |
| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |
| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not recorded |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |
| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |
| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 153.6 GB/s |
| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |
| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc B390 |
| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |
| Release Date | 2025-07-30 | 2026-01-04 |
| Launch MSRP | $211 | Not recorded |
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The benchmark data is overwhelmingly in favor of the Intel Core Ultra X9 388H. The largest single win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra X9 scores 358 versus the Core 5 120's 77, a 78.5% difference. This is followed by PassMark data encryption, where the Ultra X9 scores 28490 against 11131, a 60.9% lead. PassMark floating point math shows a 59.7% advantage for the Ultra X9, with scores of 112550 and 45383 respectively.
The PassMark physics test shows a 58.7% lead for the Ultra X9, scoring 3226 against 1333. PassMark extended instructions results in a 52.4% advantage, with scores of 29943 and 14264. PassMark random string sorting shows a 51.1% lead, with scores of 44010 and 21499.
In the multi-threaded Cinebench tests, the Ultra X9 leads by 37.7% in R15 (2955 vs 1840) and by 41.5% in R20 (13101 vs 7667). The Cinebench R23 multi-core test is closer, with the Ultra X9 leading by just 3.5% (18911 vs 18255). The PassMark multithread test shows a 49.5% lead for the Ultra X9, scoring 36811 against 18597.
In single-threaded tests, the Ultra X9 wins Cinebench R15 single-core by 16.3% (309.5 vs 259) and Cinebench R20 single-core by 41.5% (1849 vs 1082). The PassMark single-thread test shows a 16% lead for the Ultra X9 (4280 vs 3595). The Core 5 120's sole victory is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 2577 against 2200.5, a 17.1% margin. This single win highlights that while the Core 5 120 can compete in one specific single-threaded scenario, the Ultra X9's higher boost clock and newer architecture deliver superior performance across nearly every other metric.