Intel Core 5 120HL vs Intel Core 7 350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data available for the Intel Core 7 350 is extensive, while the Intel Core 5 120HL currently has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Consequently, every measurable performance comparison is a win for the Core 7 350. In Cinebench R23, the Core 7 350 scores 8030 in multi-core and 2046 in single-core. Its Cinebench R20 results are 5373 multi-core and 758 single-core, while Cinebench R15 shows 1220 multi-core and 292 single-core. The single-core score of 2046 in Cinebench R23, when compared against the multi-core score of 8030, indicates a strong per-thread efficiency that is characteristic of a high-clock, modern design.

The PassMark suite reinforces this dominance. The Core 7 350 delivers a single-thread score of 4100, a multithread score of 15170, and an average benchmark score of 17779. Its integer math score of 33734 and floating point math score of 42809 show balanced arithmetic throughput. Data compression reaches 143123, while data encryption hits 10933. Extended instructions score 12045, find prime numbers scores 107, physics scores 1173, and random string sorting scores 17238. Since the Core 5 120HL has no benchmark entries, the database records zero wins for that part and all wins for the Core 7 350 in this head-to-head.

Relative to its nearest rivals, the Core 7 350 sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs. It is 0.5% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9374F, which scores 17693. It trails the Intel Core 5 221TE by 0.5%, that rival scoring 17860. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT scores 17891, putting the Core 7 350 0.6% behind, and the Intel Core 5 120U scores 17898, a 0.7% gap. These small deltas place the Core 7 350 in a tight competitive cluster, where its measured performance is effectively level with several established desktop and mobile processors despite its lower core count.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations and process nodes. The Intel Core 5 120HL uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process, built by Intel, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS. The Intel Core 7 350 uses Wildcat Lake architecture on a 3 nm process, also built by Intel. This node difference is substantial: the 3 nm process is a much newer manufacturing technology compared to the 10 nm node of the Core 5 120HL, which explains the Core 7 350's ability to reach a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz while operating at a much lower 15 W TDP.

Core and thread configurations differ sharply. The Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core 5 120HL relies on thread count for multi-threaded capacity, but no benchmark data confirms how that translates into real performance. The Core 7 350, despite having half the cores and no extra threads, still records a multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 8030, suggesting extremely high per-core throughput from its newer architecture.

Cache hierarchies are entirely different. The Core 5 120HL provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The Core 7 350 provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The Core 7 350 has larger per-core caches, which aligns with its single-thread strength, while the Core 5 120HL has a much larger total L3 pool for its 12 cores.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 5 120HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core 5 120HL has no recorded memory bandwidth figure. The Core 7 350 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 120HL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 120HL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the Core 7 350 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Form factors and sockets are also distinct. The Core 5 120HL is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, released on 2024-04-07 with a launch MSRP of $279. The Core 7 350 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516, released on 2026-04-15 with a launch MSRP of $469. The Core 5 120HL has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz, while the Core 7 350 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 5 120HL runs at a 45 W TDP, while the Core 7 350 runs at 15 W.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 350 reaches 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core 5 120HL reaches 4.70 GHz.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the performance percentile of the Intel Core 7 350?

A: It sits at the 71st percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 17779.

Q: Does the Intel Core 5 120HL have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No, the database currently lists no benchmarks for the Intel Core 5 120HL, so its average benchmark score is 0 and its percentile is 50.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 5 120HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The Intel Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: How does the Intel Core 7 350 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 0.5% ahead of the AMD EPYC 9374F (17693), 0.5% behind the Intel Core 5 221TE (17860), 0.6% behind the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891), and 0.7% behind the Intel Core 5 120U (17898).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification field. The Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 7 350 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clocks are 2.60 GHz for the Core 5 120HL and 1.50 GHz for the Core 7 350. Boost clocks are 4.70 GHz and 4.80 GHz respectively. TDP is 45 W for the Core 5 120HL and 15 W for the Core 7 350. The Core 5 120HL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core 7 350 uses Intel BGA 1516. The architecture is Raptor Lake for the Core 5 120HL and Wildcat Lake for the Core 7 350. Process nodes are 10 nm and 3 nm respectively.

Cache configurations differ: the Core 5 120HL has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 18 MB shared L3. The Core 7 350 has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. Memory support for the Core 5 120HL is DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The Core 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 8 for the Core 5 120HL and 6 for the Core 7 350, both Gen 4 CPU-only. Integrated graphics are Iris Xe Graphics 80EU for the Core 5 120HL and Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) for the Core 7 350. The market segment is Desktop for the Core 5 120HL and Mobile for the Core 7 350. Release dates are 2024-04-07 for the Core 5 120HL and 2026-04-15 for the Core 7 350. Launch MSRP is $279 for the Core 5 120HL and $469 for the Core 7 350. Part numbers are SRPFR and SAE3F respectively. Both lack ECC support and unlocked multipliers.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the decision unambiguous. The Intel Core 7 350 is the only one of the two with any benchmark results, and those results place it at the 71st percentile of all CPUs with an average score of 17779. The Intel Core 5 120HL has no measured scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and a 50th percentile ranking. Any workload that relies on measured performance, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, must favor the Core 7 350. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8030 and single-core score of 2046 demonstrate capability across both domains. Its PassMark single-thread score of 4100 and multithread score of 15170 confirm the same pattern.

The Core 5 120HL offers more cores, more threads, a larger shared L3 cache, dual-channel memory support, and a lower launch MSRP of $279. Those specifications are real, but without benchmark data they cannot be translated into performance claims. The Core 7 350, despite fewer cores and a higher launch MSRP of $469, delivers all of the measured performance in this comparison. The Core 7 350 also operates at a 15 W TDP versus 45 W for the Core 5 120HL, which indicates far greater energy efficiency for the same or better measured output. The 3 nm process node of the Core 7 350 versus the 10 nm node of the Core 5 120HL supports this efficiency advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 350 wins every benchmark category where data exists. Single-thread performance belongs to it exclusively, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2046 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4100. Multi-thread performance also belongs to it, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8030 and a PassMark multithread score of 15170. Specialized workloads follow the same path: integer math at 33734, floating point math at 42809, data compression at 143123, data encryption at 10933, extended instructions at 12045, find prime numbers at 107, physics at 1173, and random string sorting at 17238. The Core 7 350 also wins on efficiency, with a 15 W TDP, a 3 nm process node, and a higher boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

The Intel Core 5 120HL wins only in specifications that have no benchmark confirmation. It has 12 cores versus 6, 16 threads versus 6, 18 MB of shared L3 versus 6 MB, dual-channel memory versus single-channel, 8 PCIe lanes versus 6, a lower launch MSRP of $279 versus $469, and a desktop socket that allows for standard desktop mounting. It also supports DDR4 in addition to DDR5, which broadens platform compatibility. None of these advantages are reflected in any measured score, so they remain theoretical. For any user or workload defined by actual performance numbers, the Core 7 350 is the only choice supported by the database. For a configuration requiring maximum physical cores, a desktop socket, and dual-channel memory, the Core 5 120HL offers those traits, but the absence of benchmark results prevents any assessment of its real-world speed.