CPU Comparison

The Intel Core 5 120UL and Intel Core i3-12100F are both Socket 1700 desktop parts, but they deliver completely different experiences. The benchmark data shows a decisive victory for the i3-12100F, which wins every single head-to-head test, 17 out of 17. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical (13594 vs 13494, a 0.7% difference in favor of the Core 5 120UL), yet the distribution of performance is starkly different. The i3-12100F is a high-performance, power-hungry chip, while the Core 5 120UL is a low-power part that trades raw speed for efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i3-12100F dominates across the board, but the margin varies wildly by workload. In Cinebench tests, the gap is consistent and large. The i3-12100F scores 1195 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus the Core 5 120UL's 904, a 24.4% lead. That same delta appears in single-core (168 vs 127, -24.4%) and in R20, where the i3-12100F posts 4981 multi-core and 703 single-core against 3769 and 531 from the Core 5 120UL, both roughly 24.3-24.5% ahead. In Cinebench R23, the i3-12100F hits 11860 multi-core and 1674 single-core, while the Core 5 120UL manages 8974 and 1266, again a 24.3-24.4% deficit.

The biggest single-core gap shows up in PassMark single-thread testing. The i3-12100F scores 3444, while the Core 5 120UL scores just 2080, a 39.6% difference. This is a massive generational and architectural gap that will be felt in any lightly-threaded task. For floating-point math, the i3-12100F leads by 17.7% (31977 vs 26311), and for integer math the lead narrows to 7.1% (40978 vs 38060). Data compression shows a 32% advantage for the i3-12100F (160452 vs 109090), while data encryption is closer at 4.8% (8071 vs 7685).

The most extreme result is in PassMark extended instructions, where the i3-12100F scores 10842 versus 5203, a 52% lead. This suggests the i3-12100F has substantially better SIMD/AVX execution capabilities. Even in memory-sensitive tasks like random string sorting, the i3-12100F wins by 13.9% (15809 vs 13610). The only tests where the Core 5 120UL gets close are integer math and data encryption, but it still loses both. Across all 17 tests, the i3-12100F's smallest win is 4.8%, and its average lead is well over 20%. The data is unambiguous: the i3-12100F is the faster processor in every measurable way.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different Intel generations and use different floorplans. The Core 5 120UL is based on Raptor Lake (codename Raptor Lake-PS) and packs 10 cores and 12 threads. The i3-12100F is Alder Lake (codename Alder Lake-S) with 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having 2.5x the cores and 1.5x the threads, the Core 5 120UL cannot overcome the i3-12100F's clock speed and microarchitecture efficiency.

Clock speeds tell much of the story. The Core 5 120UL has a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost of 4.60 GHz. The i3-12100F starts at 3.30 GHz base and boosts to 4.30 GHz. The i3-12100F's higher base clock is critical, its minimum performance is far higher, while the Core 5 120UL relies on boosting to reach competitive speeds. The power envelope is vastly different: the Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 watts, while the i3-12100F is rated at 58 watts. That 43-watt difference explains why the i3-12100F can sustain higher clocks under load.

Both chips share the same 10nm process node from Intel, and both have identical cache hierarchies: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Memory support is also the same, DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel. The key difference in I/O is PCIe: the Core 5 120UL offers Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-12100F provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i3-12100F's PCIe Gen 5 support is a major advantage for future-proofing and for bandwidth-hungry GPUs or NVMe drives. The Core 5 120UL includes integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, while the i3-12100F has no integrated graphics at all, the "F" suffix means a discrete GPU is mandatory. The i3-12100F also has a known die size of 163 mm², while the Core 5 120UL's die size is not listed.

Where Each One Wins

The i3-12100F wins every benchmark, so the "wins" for the Core 5 120UL are purely qualitative. Its 15W TDP makes it a clear choice for low-power or passively-cooled builds where energy efficiency trumps performance. The integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU means it can run a display without a discrete GPU, which is impossible on the i3-12100F. For basic office work, web browsing, or a home server that idles most of the time, the Core 5 120UL's lower power draw is a practical benefit.

The i3-12100F wins everywhere else. Its 39.6% lead in single-thread PassMark makes it the obvious pick for gaming, where most titles rely on one or two fast cores. Its 52% lead in extended instructions benefits video encoding, scientific computing, and any workload that uses AVX-512 or similar SIMD paths. The 32% data compression advantage helps with file archiving and backup tools. For multi-threaded rendering in Cinebench R23, the i3-12100F's 11860 versus 8974 (24.3% ahead) makes it the faster choice for budget 3D workstations, even with fewer cores. The i3-12100F's PCIe Gen 5 support also means it can drive modern high-end GPUs and storage without a bottleneck, while the Core 5 120UL is limited to Gen 4.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-threaded tasks?

A: The i3-12100F is decisively faster. In PassMark single-thread, it scores 3444 versus the Core 5 120UL's 2080, a 39.6% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the same trend: 1674 vs 1266, a 24.4% gap.

Q: Does the Core 5 120UL's extra cores make it better for multi-threaded work?

A: No. Despite having 10 cores and 12 threads versus the i3-12100F's 4 cores and 8 threads, the Core 5 120UL loses every multi-threaded benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 8974 versus 11860 for the i3-12100F, a 24.3% deficit. The i3-12100F's higher clocks and better per-core efficiency overcome the core count disadvantage.

Q: Can I use either CPU without a discrete graphics card?

A: Only the Core 5 120UL. It has integrated Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. The i3-12100F has no integrated graphics, so a separate GPU is required for any video output.

Q: Which CPU supports faster PCIe devices?

A: The i3-12100F. It supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 120UL is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This gives the i3-12100F more bandwidth for GPUs and high-speed NVMe storage.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 watts, while the i3-12100F is rated at 58 watts. This makes the Core 5 120UL far more suitable for low-power or compact builds, though it comes at a significant performance cost.

Q: Do they have the same cache and memory support?

A: Yes, on paper they are identical. Both have 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. The i3-12100F also has a listed die size of 163 mm², while the Core 5 120UL's is not specified.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the Intel Core i3-12100F is the superior processor for almost any use case that values performance. It wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with leads ranging from 4.8% in data encryption to 52% in extended instructions. Its 39.6% single-thread lead and 24.3% multi-thread lead in Cinebench R23 make it the better choice for gaming, productivity, and content creation. The only reason to pick the Core 5 120UL is if you need its 15-watt TDP for a low-power build or if you require integrated graphics to avoid a discrete GPU. Even then, the performance gap is severe, the i3-12100F is faster in every measurable metric, and the Core 5 120UL's average benchmark score (13594) is only 0.7% higher than the i3-12100F's (13494), which is within noise and does not reflect its consistent losses.

Specification Differences

| Field | Intel Core 5 120UL | Intel Core i3-12100F |

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

| Cores | 10 | 4 |

| Threads | 12 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 1.30 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 58 W |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Alder Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Alder Lake-S |

| Die Size | Not listed | 163 mm² |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU | None |

| Release Date | 2024-04-07 | Not listed |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $97 |

| Part Number | unknown | SRL63 |