Intel Core 5 120HL vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the Intel Core 5 120HL and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus holds an average benchmark score of 93,785, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 120HL, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile. This alone positions the two processors at opposite ends of the performance spectrum.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 44,253 points. Single-core performance in the same test reaches 2,439 points. The Core 5 120HL has no comparable benchmark entries, so the direct numerical comparison relies entirely on the Core Ultra 7's recorded results. The Core Ultra 7 also delivers 24,461 in Cinebench R20 multi-core and 3,453 in single-core, alongside 6,656 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 354 in single-core. These figures indicate substantial throughput in both heavily threaded and lightly threaded workloads.

PassMark results reinforce the same conclusion. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 68,574 in multithreaded performance and 5,068 in single-thread performance. Integer math reaches 175,986, while floating point math hits 229,491. Data compression tasks complete at a rate of 804,322, and data encryption scores 59,097. Extended instruction workloads produce 63,506, and random string sorting finishes at 96,945. Prime number finding yields 615, and physics calculations reach 4,064. Every one of these scores belongs exclusively to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus; the database shows no corresponding results for the Core 5 120HL.

The nearest rivals to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus in the database are all server-class processors. The Intel Xeon 6520P matches its average score at 93,786, a delta of 0 percent. The AMD EPYC 4564P scores 95,183, which is 1.5 percent higher. The AMD EPYC 9175F scores 95,615, or 1.9 percent higher. The AMD EPYC 4565P scores 95,764, or 2.1 percent higher. These deltas are small, meaning the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus competes directly with enterprise silicon despite its desktop positioning. The Core 5 120HL has no rivals listed in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from distinct Intel design lineages. The Core 5 120HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, and is manufactured on a 3 nm node by TSMC. The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap, as the smaller node allows for higher transistor density and efficiency.

Core counts differ sharply. The Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core Ultra 7 has twice the physical cores but the same thread count as its core count, indicating no hyperthreading on its efficiency cores. The Core 5 120HL, with 16 threads on 12 cores, does use simultaneous multithreading on some cores. Clock speeds also favor the Core Ultra 7: base clock of 3.70 GHz versus 2.60 GHz, and boost clock of 5.50 GHz versus 4.70 GHz.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core 5 120HL carries 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, with 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7's L3 cache is exactly double that of the Core 5. Transistor count for the Core Ultra 7 is 17,800 million, and its die size is 243 mm². The Core 5 120HL has no recorded transistor or die size data.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 5 120HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory across a dual-channel bus. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 only, also dual-channel, with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 additionally supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 does not. PCIe connectivity favors the Core Ultra 7 as well: it provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, compared to Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the Core 5.

Integrated graphics differ in execution unit count. The Core 5 120HL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 EUs. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 EUs. Despite fewer execution units, the Core Ultra 7's graphics architecture is newer. The Core 5 120HL has a locked multiplier, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads. The Core Ultra 7 has exactly double the core count of the Core 5.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus boosts to 5.50 GHz, while the Core 5 120HL boosts to 4.70 GHz. That is a difference of 0.80 GHz in favor of the Core Ultra 7.

Q: Do both processors support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5. However, the Core 5 120HL also supports DDR4, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports DDR5 exclusively. The Core Ultra 7 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the Core 5 has no bandwidth figure.

Q: Is ECC memory supported?

A: Only the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports ECC memory. The Core 5 120HL does not support ECC.

Q: What is the manufacturing process for each?

A: The Core 5 120HL is built on a 10 nm node by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is built on a 3 nm node by TSMC. The Core Ultra 7 also has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm².

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an average benchmark score of 93,785 and sits in the 96th percentile. The Core 5 120HL has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits in the 50th percentile. The database contains no individual benchmark scores for the Core 5 120HL.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 120HL | Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus |

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

| Cores | 12 | 24 |

| Threads | 16 | 24 |

| Base clock | 2.60 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

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

| L2 cache | 2 MB per core | 3 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 18 MB shared | 36 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 only |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2026-03-10 |

| Launch MSRP | $279 | $299 |

| Part number | SRPFR | SA4V6 |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins in every measurable performance category recorded in the database. Its 24 cores and 24 threads, combined with a 5.50 GHz boost clock, deliver benchmark results that place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 44,253, the PassMark multithread score of 68,574, and the floating point math score of 229,491 all demonstrate strong throughput for parallel workloads. The single-thread score of 5,068 in PassMark and 2,439 in Cinebench R23 indicate high per-core efficiency as well.

The Core Ultra 7 also wins on connectivity and memory features. Its PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes doubles the lane count and doubles the transfer generation relative to the Core 5's Gen 4 with 8 lanes. ECC memory support makes it suitable for error-sensitive compute tasks. The 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth provides a measurable data throughput advantage. The unlocked multiplier allows user-controlled frequency adjustment.

The Intel Core 5 120HL wins only in areas where the Core Ultra 7 has no competing feature. It supports DDR4 memory, which the Core Ultra 7 does not, making it compatible with older memory platforms. Its integrated graphics has more execution units, 80 versus 64, which may benefit certain graphics workloads. Its lower TDP of 45 W versus 125 W indicates lower power draw, though the database does not record efficiency metrics beyond TDP. The Core 5 also has an earlier release date, 2024-04-07 versus 2026-03-10, and a lower launch MSRP of $279 versus $299.

The Verdict

The benchmark data directs a clear choice toward the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus for any performance-oriented use case. The average benchmark score of 93,785 places it in the 96th percentile, and its nearest rivals are server-class processors like the Intel Xeon 6520P and AMD EPYC 4564P, with deltas of only 0 percent to negative 2.1 percent. The Core 5 120HL, with no recorded benchmark scores and a 50th percentile ranking, cannot compete on measured performance.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the appropriate pick for workloads that stress multi-core throughput, memory bandwidth, or PCIe connectivity. Its 24 cores, 36 MB of L3 cache, 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes provide a robust platform for heavy compute. The unlocked multiplier adds flexibility for users who adjust clock speeds.

The Intel Core 5 120HL suits scenarios where DDR4 compatibility matters, where lower power consumption is prioritized, or where the integrated graphics execution unit count is relevant. Its 45 W TDP is substantially lower than the Core Ultra 7's 125 W TDP. Its 80 EU integrated graphics exceeds the Core Ultra 7's 64 EU configuration.

The database records no head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these two processors. All available performance data belongs to the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Based strictly on the recorded metrics, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the superior processor in every measured dimension, while the Core 5 120HL retains advantages only in compatibility, power envelope, and graphics execution unit count.