Intel Core 5 120UL vs Intel Core i5-9400F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the Intel Core 5 120UL and the Intel Core i5-9400F shows a clear split in workload types. In the majority of tested scenarios, the Core 5 120UL takes the lead, winning 12 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The i5-9400F counters with 5 wins, but those victories are concentrated in specific single-threaded and memory-sensitive tasks.

Starting with the multi-core rendering tests, the Core 5 120UL is consistently ahead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 904 against 810, a delta of 11.6%. The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (3769 vs 3376, 11.6%) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (8974 vs 8040, 11.6%). The single-core Cinebench results follow the same trajectory: R15 single-core shows 127 vs 114 (11.4%), R20 single-core shows 531 vs 476 (11.6%), and R23 single-core shows 1266 vs 1135 (11.5%). These consistent margins across all three Cinebench generations indicate a structural advantage in the Core 5 120UL’s architecture rather than a test-specific anomaly.

The PassMark suite reveals more nuanced behavior. The Core 5 120UL dominates in integer math, scoring 38060 against 26155, a 45.5% advantage. Floating point math also favors the Core 5 120UL at 26311 vs 22465, a 17.1% lead. Prime number finding shows a 23.7% gap (47 vs 38), and the physics test sees the Core 5 120UL ahead by 23.6% (807 vs 653). Data encryption is the single largest victory for the Core 5 120UL: 7685 vs 2902, a staggering 164.8% delta. This suggests the newer processor’s instruction set and threading capabilities provide a massive edge in cryptographic workloads.

However, the i5-9400F wins in several important areas. PassMark data compression shows the i5-9400F at 132877 vs 109090, a 17.9% advantage for the older chip. Extended instructions also favor the i5-9400F decisively: 11684 vs 5203, a 55.5% gap. Random string sorting goes to the i5-9400F at 16298 vs 13610, a 16.5% lead. Perhaps most notably, the single-threaded PassMark score is higher on the i5-9400F: 2428 vs 2080, a 14.3% difference. This single-thread result is interesting because the Cinebench single-core tests showed the opposite outcome, suggesting that the PassMark single-thread test exercises different instruction paths or memory access patterns.

The overall average benchmark score reflects this mixed picture: the Core 5 120UL averages 13594, while the i5-9400F averages 13041. Both processors sit at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 120UL’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F (0.7% higher score) and the Intel Core i5-9500 (1.1% higher), while the i5-9400F’s closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-10750H (0.1% higher) and the Intel Core i5-8500 (0.8% lower). These proximity scores show that the Core 5 120UL and i5-9400F, despite their architectural differences, land in a similar performance band overall, but with very different workload profiles.

The Verdict

The data suggests two distinct usage scenarios. For users whose workloads are heavily threaded, involve encryption, integer math, or modern instruction set extensions, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the clear choice. Its 164.8% lead in data encryption and 45.5% lead in integer math are decisive. The 11.6% to 11.7% margins across all Cinebench multi-core tests and PassMark multithread (10558 vs 9455) reinforce this conclusion. The Core 5 120UL’s 10 cores and 12 threads provide a substantial parallel throughput advantage over the i5-9400F’s 6 cores and 6 threads.

For users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness in legacy applications or workloads that benefit from higher clock speed per core, the i5-9400F holds a measurable edge. The PassMark single-thread score of 2428 vs 2080 (14.3% higher) and the data compression result (17.9% higher) indicate that the older chip’s 4.10 GHz boost clock can outperform the newer chip in specific tasks. The extended instructions result, where the i5-9400F leads by 55.5%, suggests that certain legacy or specialized instruction sequences run much faster on the Coffee Lake architecture.

However, the overall benchmark average favors the Core 5 120UL (13594 vs 13041), and the newer processor wins the majority of tests. The i5-9400F is an end-of-life product, while the Core 5 120UL is active in production. The i5-9400F uses Socket 1151 and a 14 nm process, while the Core 5 120UL uses Socket 1700 and a 10 nm process. The Core 5 120UL also integrates Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, whereas the i5-9400F has no integrated graphics. For a new system build, the Core 5 120UL offers the better balance of multi-threaded performance, modern platform support, and active production status. The i5-9400F remains competitive only in narrow single-thread or compression-heavy scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different Intel design eras. The Core 5 120UL is built on Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, using a 10 nm process node. The i5-9400F uses the older Coffee Lake architecture, with a 14 nm process. This process difference explains part of the power and efficiency gap: the Core 5 120UL has a 15 W TDP while the i5-9400F draws 65 W.

The core configuration differs substantially. The Core 5 120UL packs 10 cores and 12 threads, while the i5-9400F has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading on the older chip. The Core 5 120UL’s base clock of 1.30 GHz is much lower than the i5-9400F’s 2.90 GHz, but the boost clocks are closer: 4.60 GHz for the Core 5 120UL versus 4.10 GHz for the i5-9400F. This indicates that the Core 5 120UL relies on its higher boost capability and additional cores to overcome its low base clock.

Cache hierarchies are also different. The Core 5 120UL provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The i5-9400F offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 9 MB of shared L3. The larger L2 and L3 caches on the Core 5 120UL likely contribute to its strong performance in encryption and integer workloads.

Memory support diverges significantly. The Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the i5-9400F is limited to DDR4. The i5-9400F has a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s; the Core 5 120UL does not have a listed bandwidth figure, but its DDR5 support implies a higher potential ceiling. The PCIe interface also differs: the Core 5 120UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-9400F provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

The integrated graphics situation is notable. The Core 5 120UL includes Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, making it a complete package for systems without a discrete GPU. The i5-9400F has no integrated graphics, as indicated by the “F” suffix, forcing the use of a separate graphics card. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in every major specification category. The Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads; the i5-9400F has 6 cores and 6 threads. Base clock is 1.30 GHz for the Core 5 120UL versus 2.90 GHz for the i5-9400F. Boost clock is 4.60 GHz versus 4.10 GHz. TDP is 15 W for the Core 5 120UL versus 65 W for the i5-9400F. The socket changes from Intel Socket 1700 on the Core 5 120UL to Intel Socket 1151 on the i5-9400F. The process node is 10 nm versus 14 nm. The architecture is Raptor Lake versus Coffee Lake, with codenames Raptor Lake-PS and Coffee Lake respectively.

Cache sizes differ across all levels: L1 per core is 80 KB versus 64 KB, L2 per core is 1.25 MB versus 256 KB, and L3 shared is 12 MB versus 9 MB. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 5 120UL versus DDR4 only for the i5-9400F. The i5-9400F has a listed memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s; the Core 5 120UL has no listed bandwidth. PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the Core 5 120UL versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the i5-9400F. The Core 5 120UL has Iris Xe Graphics 80EU; the i5-9400F has no integrated graphics. Production status is Active versus End-of-life. Release dates are April 2024 for the Core 5 120UL and January 2019 for the i5-9400F. The i5-9400F has a recorded part number; the Core 5 120UL’s part number is unknown. Both are desktop market segments, both have no unlocked multiplier, and neither supports ECC.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core i5-9400F has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: How much faster is the Core 5 120UL in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Core 5 120UL scores 8974 versus 8040 for the i5-9400F, a delta of 11.6%.

Q: In which test does the i5-9400F have its largest advantage?

A: The i5-9400F leads by 55.5% in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 11684 versus 5203.

Q: What is the single-threaded PassMark score difference?

A: The i5-9400F scores 2428 versus 2080 for the Core 5 120UL, a 14.3% advantage for the older chip.

Q: Does the Core 5 120UL support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, the Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the i5-9400F supports only DDR4.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 W, while the i5-9400F has a TDP of 65 W.