Intel Core 5 120U vs Intel Core 5 330 Comparison

The Intel Core 5 330 and the Intel Core 5 120U are two mobile chips that sit in surprisingly similar territory despite representing very different design philosophies. Both carry a 15 W thermal rating, both land in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database, and their average benchmark scores are close: 18345 for the Core 5 330 versus 17898 for the Core 5 120U. Yet the recorded results reveal a sharply split personality, with the newer Core 5 330 winning 13 of 17 head-to-head tests while the older Raptor Lake-U part still claims four meaningful victories. The data invites a closer look at how a 6-core, 6-thread processor on a 3 nm node can outpunch a 10-core, 12-thread rival, and where the extra threads of the 120U still earn their keep.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single most striking result in the entire dataset is Cinebench R23 multi-core. The Core 5 330 scored 13150 against 6659 for the Core 5 120U, a lead of 97.5 percent, meaning it effectively doubled the older chip's output in that sustained rendering workload. That result is all the more curious because the two processors were nearly identical in the older Cinebench R20 multi-core run, where the 330 scored 5523 to 5349, a gap of just 3.3 percent, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the 330 led 1325 to 1150.5, or 15.2 percent. What changed between R20 and R23? The database cannot answer directly, but the pattern suggests the 330 sustains its clocks far better in longer, heavier multi-threaded runs, while the 120U's advantage in thread count erodes under sustained load.

Prime number finding tells a similar story. The Core 5 330 scored 114 in PassMark's find prime numbers test against 53 for the 120U, a 115.1 percent lead. Extended instructions went the same way, 12808 to 9299, a 37.7 percent win for the 330. Floating point math favored the 330 by 21.8 percent, 43885 to 36026, and physics favored it by 28.2 percent, 1201 to 937.

Single-threaded results mostly tilt the same direction, with one notable exception. PassMark single-thread scored 4088 for the 330 versus 3479 for the 120U, a 17.5 percent edge. Cinebench R23 single-core went to the 330 by 5.7 percent (1856 versus 1756.5) and R20 single-core by 3.2 percent (779 versus 755). The exception is Cinebench R15 single-core, where the 120U scored 245 against 186, a 24.1 percent win for the older chip. That is an odd inversion given the newer chip's otherwise consistent single-thread leads, and it hints that the short R15 burst workload plays to the 120U's higher 5.00 GHz boost clock rather than its architectural efficiency.

The Core 5 120U's four wins deserve scrutiny. Beyond that R15 single-core result, it won data compression at 166432 versus 145287, a 12.7 percent lead, integer math at 52280 versus 33258, a 36.4 percent lead, and random string sorting at 19060 versus 17771, a 6.8 percent lead. Integer math is its strongest suit, and it is interesting that the two memory-and-integer flavored tests (compression and string sorting) both went its way. The 120U's dual-channel memory bus is the obvious suspect, though the database records no bandwidth figure for it, so that connection remains an inference rather than a measurement.

Where Each One Wins

For sustained multi-threaded work, the data is unambiguous. The Core 5 330's near-doubling of the 120U in Cinebench R23 multi-core, combined with wins in floating point, physics, prime finding, and encryption (11076 versus 10453, a 6 percent edge), makes it the clear choice for rendering, simulation, physics-heavy computation, and any workload that runs all cores for minutes at a time.

The Core 5 120U carves out a narrower but real niche. Its 36.4 percent integer math win and its compression lead make it credible for integer-heavy code, archival and decompression tasks, and sorting-heavy workloads. If a workload profile resembles its four winning tests, the older chip is not just competitive but clearly ahead.

Burst-oriented single-threaded use is murkier. The 330 wins nearly every modern single-thread test, but the 120U's R15 single-core victory shows it can still win short burst scenarios. The overall evidence favors the 330 for responsiveness, with the caveat that the 120U spikes higher in at least one burst benchmark.

Both chips share a 72nd percentile ranking against all CPUs in the database, which frames them as solidly mid-pack performers. The 330's nearest rivals by average score are the Intel Core i3-14100 (18318, within 0.1 percent), the Intel Core 7 360 (18374, 0.2 percent ahead), the Intel Core i3-13100 (18380, 0.2 percent ahead), and the Intel Core 3 305 (18302, 0.2 percent behind). The 120U clusters with the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891, dead even), the Intel Core 5 221TE (17860, 0.2 percent behind), the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (17994, 0.5 percent ahead), and the Intel Core 7 350 (17779, 0.7 percent behind). In short, both sit in the same neighborhood, but the 330 occupies the slightly higher rung.

Architecture Differences

These two chips could hardly be more different internally. The Core 5 330 is built on Intel's 3 nm process, carries the Wildcat Lake codename, and offers 6 cores and 6 threads with a 1.50 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The Core 5 120U is a Raptor Lake-U design on Intel's 10 nm process, with 10 cores and 12 threads arranged around a 1.40 GHz base and a 5.00 GHz boost.

Cache philosophies diverge too. The 330 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The 120U is specced per core, with 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core plus 12 MB of shared L3, doubling the L3 capacity of its rival. Despite half the L3 and two-thirds fewer threads, the 330 wins most multi-threaded tests, which raises interesting questions about how much the newer 3 nm node and refreshed core design contribute relative to raw thread count.

Memory support splits along generational lines. The 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, delivering 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The 120U supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus, though no bandwidth figure is recorded. Platform connectivity also differs: the 330 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the 120U offers Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well, with the 330 pairing Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) and the 120U pairing Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Neither supports ECC memory, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both use different BGA sockets (1516 for the 330, 1744 for the 120U), so they are not interchangeable on any board. The 330 launched on April 15, 2026 with a launch MSRP of $309; the 120U launched on January 7, 2024.

The Verdict

The database points clearly toward the Core 5 330 for most buyers. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests, posts a higher average score (18345 versus 17898), and delivers its largest margins precisely in the sustained multi-core workloads that tend to matter most over a laptop's life. Its modern memory support (DDR5 and LPDDR5X) and newer process node round out the case.

The Core 5 120U remains defensible for specific profiles: integer-dominated computation, compression-heavy workflows, and workloads matching its four winning benchmarks. Its dual-channel memory and larger 12 MB L3 may explain those wins, though the recorded data does not confirm causation. For everyone else, the 330's consistency across single- and multi-threaded modern tests makes it the stronger pick.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall? A: The Intel Core 5 330, with 13 wins out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and a higher average score of 18345 versus 17898.

Q: How big is the Core 5 330's lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core? A: It scored 13150 versus 6659, a 97.5 percent advantage, nearly double the 120U's result.

Q: Does the Core 5 120U win anything? A: Yes. It leads in integer math (52280 versus 33258, 36.4 percent), data compression (166432 versus 145287, 12.7 percent), random string sorting (19060 versus 17771, 6.8 percent), and Cinebench R15 single-core (245 versus 186, 24.1 percent).

Q: Which chip has more cores? A: The Core 5 120U, with 10 cores and 12 threads, versus 6 cores and 6 threads on the Core 5 330.

Q: Do both CPUs have the same TDP? A: Yes, both are rated at 15 W and both are mobile parts in the 72nd percentile of the database.

Q: Which has more L3 cache? A: The Core 5 120U, with 12 MB shared, versus 6 MB shared on the Core 5 330.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 330 | Intel Core 5 120U |

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

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Raptor Lake-U |

| Architecture | Not recorded | Raptor Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

| Cores / Threads | 6 / 6 | 10 / 12 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

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

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 lanes (CPU only) |

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

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Release date | April 15, 2026 | January 7, 2024 |

| Launch MSRP | $309 | Not recorded |

| Part number | SAE3G | SRM7P |

Both CPUs share a 15 W TDP, lack ECC support, have locked multipliers, and sit in the mobile segment with active production status.