Intel Core 5 120HL vs Intel Core 5 320 Comparison

The database contains two Intel Core 5 processors with different market positions. The Intel Core 5 120HL is a desktop Raptor Lake-PS part on Intel Socket 1700 with 12 cores, 16 threads, a 2.60 GHz base clock, a 4.70 GHz boost clock, and a 45 W TDP. The Intel Core 5 320 is a mobile Wildcat Lake part on Intel BGA 1516 with 6 cores, 6 threads, a 1.50 GHz base clock, a 4.60 GHz boost clock, and a 15 W TDP. The 120HL has no recorded benchmark scores, while the 320 carries a full Cinebench and PassMark benchmark list. This asymmetry shapes the comparison: one part can be analyzed through measured scores, the other only through its specification fields.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table for these two CPUs is empty. Neither side records a win in a direct comparison. The only measured benchmark data in the dataset belongs to the Core 5 320, so any head-to-head analysis must use its nearest-rival deltas and absolute scores.

The Core 5 320 has an average benchmark score of 18023 and sits at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are tightly clustered. The AMD Ryzen 5 1600 averages 17994, putting the 320 0.2% ahead. The Intel Core 5 120U averages 17898, putting the 320 0.7% ahead. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT averages 17891, also putting the 320 0.7% ahead. The Intel Core i5-1334U averages 18154, which places the 320 0.7% behind. These four deltas are the closest performance comparisons recorded for the 320.

In Cinebench, the 320 records 1054 in R15 multi-core and 276 in R15 single-core. In R20 it records 5462 multi-core and 771 single-core. In R23 it records 6197 multi-core and 1926 single-core. The single-core progression from R15 to R23 is 276, 771, and 1926, while the multi-core progression is 1054, 5462, and 6197. The 120HL has no Cinebench entries, so no equivalent numbers exist for comparison. The largest recorded win for the 320 is 0.7% over the Core 5 120U and the Ryzen 5 3600XT, and its largest recorded loss is 0.7% to the Core i5-1334U. No opposite-direction win exists for the 120HL because its nearest-rival list is empty.

FAQ

Q: What benchmark scores does the Core 5 320 record in Cinebench R23?

A: It records 6197 in multi-core and 1926 in single-core. These are part of a benchmark list that also includes R15 scores of 1054 and 276, plus R20 scores of 5462 and 771.

Q: Does the Core 5 120HL have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. Its benchmark array is empty, its average benchmark score is 0, and its nearest-rivals list is empty. The database records no measured performance for the 120HL in any workload.

Q: How does the Core 5 320 compare with its nearest rivals?

A: The 320 averages 18023. It is 0.2% above the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17994), 0.7% above the Intel Core 5 120U (17898), and 0.7% above the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891). It is 0.7% below the Intel Core i5-1334U (18154).

Q: What memory configurations are recorded for each CPU?

A: The 120HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus and records a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The 120HL has no memory bandwidth value in the database.

Q: What sockets and market segments are listed?

A: The 120HL uses Intel Socket 1700 and is listed as Desktop. The 320 uses Intel BGA 1516 and is listed as Mobile. Both parts are listed with Active production status.

Q: Which integrated graphics are present?

A: The 120HL lists Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The 320 lists Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). Both parts have locked multipliers and no ECC support.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different Intel families. The 120HL is recorded as Raptor Lake with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, while the 320 has no architecture field but carries the codename Wildcat Lake. Their generations are Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS) and Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). Both are built by Intel, but on different process nodes: 10 nm for the 120HL and 3 nm for the 320.

The core layouts differ substantially. The 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The 120HL lists L1 cache as 80 KB per core and L2 cache as 2 MB per core, with 18 MB of shared L3. The 320 lists L1 cache as 192 KB, L2 cache as 2.5 MB, and 6 MB of shared L3. These cache fields are not directly comparable because the 120HL uses per-core units and the 320 uses aggregate units.

Memory architecture also differs. The 120HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus and records 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The 120HL has no memory bandwidth entry. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 for both, but the 120HL provides 8 CPU lanes and the 320 provides 6 CPU lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well: Iris Xe Graphics 80EU on the 120HL versus Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) on the 320. TDPs are 45 W and 15 W respectively, which matches the Desktop and Mobile market segments.

The Verdict

The recorded data does not permit a direct performance verdict. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the 120HL has no benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals. The 320 has measured scores and an average benchmark score of 18023.

What the data does show is a clean platform split. The 120HL is the desktop part: Intel Socket 1700, 12 cores, 16 threads, dual-channel DDR4/DDR5, 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and a 45 W TDP. The 320 is the mobile part: Intel BGA 1516, 6 cores, 6 threads, single-channel DDR5/LPDDR5X, 6 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and a 15 W TDP. The 320's process node is 3 nm against the 120HL's 10 nm.

The 320's nearest-rival deltas are narrow. It sits 0.2% above the Ryzen 5 1600, 0.7% above the Core 5 120U, 0.7% above the Ryzen 5 3600XT, and 0.7% below the Core i5-1334U. The 120HL has no such recorded deltas. The only ranking comparison in the database places the 320 at the 72nd percentile and the 120HL at the 50th percentile, but that ranking is not a substitute for a head-to-head benchmark.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 5 120HL | Intel Core 5 320 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 6 |

| Base clock | 2.60 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | not specified |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Wildcat Lake |

| Generation | Core 5 (Raptor Lake-PS) | Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

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

| L2 cache | 2 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 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $279 | $340 |

| Part number | SRPFR | SAE3H |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 50 | 72 |

| Average benchmark score | 0 | 18023 |

| Benchmark entries | none | Cinebench and PassMark scores recorded |

| Nearest rivals | none | four entries recorded |

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 320 is the only part in this pair with measured wins in the database. Its Cinebench results are 1054 in R15 multi-core, 276 in R15 single-core, 5462 in R20 multi-core, 771 in R20 single-core, 6197 in R23 multi-core, and 1926 in R23 single-core. In PassMark workloads, it records 148779 in data compression, 42440 in floating point math, 32323 in integer math, 18038 in random string sorting, 15450 in multithread, 13262 in extended instructions, 10984 in data encryption, 1221 in physics, 110 in find prime numbers, and 4045 in single-thread.

These scores give the 320 a measured presence in both single-thread and multi-thread workloads. Its nearest-rival deltas show wins over three of four listed rivals: 0.2% over the AMD Ryzen 5 1600, 0.7% over the Intel Core 5 120U, and 0.7% over the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT, with a 0.7% loss to the Intel Core i5-1334U.

The Core 5 120HL has no benchmark entries, so the database records no workload wins for it. Its recorded strengths are specification-based: 12 cores, 16 threads, 18 MB shared L3, dual-channel memory, 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes, and a desktop Socket 1700 package. The 320's recorded strengths are its 3 nm process node, 15 W TDP, 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 72nd percentile ranking. The use-case split follows market segment: the 320 is the mobile part with measured scores, while the 120HL is the desktop part without measured scores in the database.