CPU Comparison

The Intel Core 5 120UL and Intel Core i5-10400 represent two distinct design philosophies from Intel, separated by four years of architectural evolution. The benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: the newer Raptor Lake-based 120UL dominates in computational workloads, while the older Comet Lake i5-10400 retains surprising strengths in specific memory and instruction-heavy tasks. With the Core 5 120UL securing 10 wins against 7 for the i5-10400 across 17 head-to-head tests, the overall picture is one of generational progress tempered by niche advantages for the incumbent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victories for the Intel Core 5 120UL come in encryption and prime number workloads. In the PassMark data encryption test, the 120UL scores 7685 against 4078 for the i5-10400, a massive 88.5% advantage. Similarly, the 120UL's score of 47 in PassMark find prime numbers represents a 38.2% lead over the i5-10400's 34. These results indicate a significantly more efficient cryptographic and mathematical processing pipeline in the newer architecture.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent, if more modest, superiority for the 120UL. Across R15, R20, and R23, the 120UL wins both single-core and multi-core tests by nearly identical margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 120UL scores 8974 versus 8316 for the i5-10400, a 7.9% advantage. Single-core performance follows the same pattern: 1266 versus 1174, a 7.8% lead. The R15 and R20 results mirror this exactly, with deltas of 7.9% and 7.7% respectively. This consistency suggests a uniform clock-for-clock efficiency gain rather than workload-specific optimization.

The i5-10400 strikes back emphatically in data compression and extended instructions. Its PassMark data compression score of 187207 crushes the 120UL's 109090, a 41.7% deficit for the newer chip. The extended instructions test shows an even larger gap: 12501 for the i5-10400 versus 5203 for the 120UL, meaning the older chip is 58.4% faster. Random string sorting also favors the i5-10400 heavily, with a 41.4% advantage (23206 versus 13610). These three tests suggest the i5-10400 has superior memory bandwidth utilization and SIMD instruction throughput in certain scenarios.

The remaining tests split more closely. The i5-10400 wins PassMark multi-thread by 12.1% (12006 versus 10558) and integer math by 8.8% (41715 versus 38060). Single-thread performance also favors the i5-10400, with its 2560 score beating the 120UL's 2080 by 18.7%. However, the 120UL wins floating point math narrowly at 26311 versus 26080 (0.9%) and dominates physics simulation with a 20.6% lead (807 versus 669).

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural split explains these benchmark patterns. The Intel Core 5 120UL uses Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm process node, while the Intel Core i5-10400 employs Comet Lake on a 14 nm node. This process advantage gives the 120UL a significant efficiency headroom, reflected in its 15 W TDP versus the i5-10400's 65 W TDP.

Core configurations differ substantially. The 120UL packs 10 cores and 12 threads, while the i5-10400 offers 6 cores and 12 threads. Both support 12 threads total, but the 120UL's additional physical cores provide raw parallel capacity. Cache hierarchies also diverge: the 120UL has 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core, compared to 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core for the i5-10400. Both share 12 MB L3, but the per-core L2 advantage for the 120UL is substantial.

Memory and I/O capabilities show clear generational progress. The 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel architecture, while the i5-10400 is limited to DDR4 only (with a stated 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth). PCIe connectivity also differs: the 120UL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, whereas the i5-10400 offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The 120UL features Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, a more capable integrated GPU than the i5-10400's UHD Graphics 630.

The sockets are incompatible: the 120UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the i5-10400 uses Intel Socket 1200. This means platform upgrades require new motherboards regardless of performance considerations. The 120UL's boost clock of 4.60 GHz exceeds the i5-10400's 4.30 GHz, and its base clock of 1.30 GHz is substantially lower than the i5-10400's 2.90 GHz, reflecting the power-efficient design targets of the newer chip.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture for workload selection. The Intel Core 5 120UL is the preferred choice for encryption-heavy applications, digital rights management, secure communications, and any workload involving prime number calculations. Its 88.5% encryption advantage and 38.2% prime number lead are not marginal differences; they represent categories where the newer architecture is categorically superior. Physics simulation is another stronghold, with the 20.6% lead indicating better floating-point scheduling for game physics or scientific modeling.

The i5-10400 excels in data compression and decompression tasks, including file archiving, database operations, and streaming workloads where its 41.7% compression advantage and 41.4% random string sorting lead matter. The extended instructions test, where the i5-10400 is 58.4% faster, suggests this chip handles AVX or other complex instruction sets more efficiently, making it suitable for multimedia encoding or scientific computing that leverages those paths.

For general multi-threaded productivity, the i5-10400's 12.1% multi-thread win and 8.8% integer math advantage indicate it remains competitive for office suites, web browsing, and typical application workloads. The 18.7% single-thread advantage for the i5-10400 is notable, suggesting that legacy software with poor multi-threading will actually run better on the older chip. However, the 120UL's 7.9% Cinebench multi-core lead shows that properly threaded rendering workloads prefer the newer chip.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the superior processor for modern, security-conscious, and computationally intensive workloads. Its wins in Cinebench across all versions, encryption, prime numbers, floating point math, and physics demonstrate broad architectural superiority in rendering and scientific tasks. The 88.5% encryption lead and 38.2% prime number advantage are decisive, making the 120UL the obvious choice for any application involving cryptography, secure boot processes, or mathematical modeling.

However, the i5-10400 cannot be dismissed for users whose workloads are dominated by compression, extended instruction sets, and single-threaded legacy applications. The 58.4% extended instructions lead and 41.7% compression advantage make it a stronger option for data-heavy server roles or development environments that rely on those specific code paths. Its 18.7% single-thread win also matters for older software that hasn't been optimized for multi-core execution.

The overall average benchmark score slightly favors the i5-10400 at 14037 versus 13594 for the 120UL, a 3.3% difference. Both sit at the 68th percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are peers in the broader market. The 120UL's nearest rivals include the Core i3-12100F (0.7% delta) and Core 3 N355 (0.8% delta), while the i5-10400 sits near the EPYC 7552 (-0.6% delta) and Xeon 6756E (-0.9% delta). For new system builders, the 120UL's platform longevity with DDR5 support and PCIe Gen 4 makes it the forward-looking pick. For those already on Socket 1200 platforms, the i5-10400 remains a capable choice with proven strengths.

FAQ

Q: Is the Intel Core 5 120UL faster than the i5-10400 in multi-core rendering?

A: Yes, consistently so. The 120UL leads by 7.9% in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests, with scores of 904 versus 838, 3769 versus 3492, and 8974 versus 8316 respectively.

Q: Why does the i5-10400 win the PassMark multi-thread test?

A: The i5-10400 scores 12006 versus 10558 for the 120UL, a 12.1% advantage. This is likely due to its higher base clock of 2.90 GHz and 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth, which benefit the specific workload mix in that test.

Q: Which processor is better for encryption workloads?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL is dramatically better. It scores 7685 in PassMark data encryption versus 4078 for the i5-10400, an 88.5% improvement. This is the largest single-test advantage in the entire comparison.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory types?

A: No. The 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel architecture, while the i5-10400 supports DDR4 only. The 120UL also uses PCIe Gen 4, compared to the i5-10400's Gen 3.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: The i5-10400 wins PassMark single-thread with 2560 versus 2080 for the 120UL, an 18.7% advantage. However, in Cinebench R23 single-core, the 120UL wins 1266 versus 1174, a 7.8% lead. The results are workload-dependent.

Q: Are these processors on the same socket?

A: No. The 120UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the i5-10400 uses Intel Socket 1200. They are not interchangeable, and each requires a different motherboard platform.