Intel Core 5 120UL vs Intel Core i7-10750H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a clear split between these two processors. The Intel Core i7-10750H wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core 5 120UL takes 4 wins. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count suggests.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the Core i7-10750H holds a consistent advantage across every rendering test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7-10750H scores 979 against 904 for the Core 5 120UL, a 7.7% lead. The single-core R15 test shows a similar gap: 138 versus 127, an 8% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R20, the i7-10750H posts 4081 multicore and 576 single-core, while the Core 5 120UL records 3769 and 531 respectively, deltas of 7.6% and 7.8%. The R23 results mirror this pattern exactly, with the i7-10750H ahead by 7.7% in both multicore (9718 versus 8974) and single-core (1372 versus 1266) workloads. These margins are remarkably uniform, suggesting a consistent clock-speed driven advantage rather than architectural superiority in rendering tasks.

The PassMark suite reveals where each processor excels. The most dramatic divergence appears in data compression, where the Core i7-10750H scores 167213 versus 109090 for the Core 5 120UL, a massive 34.8% advantage. Random string sorting follows a similar trajectory, with the i7-10750H ahead by 36.4% (21416 versus 13610). Extended instructions show the i7-10750H leading by 50.3% (10470 versus 5203), the largest single margin in either direction. The single-thread PassMark tests also favor the i7-10750H, which scores 2625 against 2080, a 20.8% gap that appears in both the single_thread and singlethread entries.

The Core 5 120UL counters in several specific workloads. Data encryption shows its strongest result: 7685 versus 3930, a 95.5% advantage for the Core 5 120UL, nearly doubling the i7-10750H's score. Prime number finding favors the Core 5 120UL by 20.5% (47 versus 39). Physics calculations go to the Core 5 120UL with 807 versus 700, a 15.3% edge. Floating point math is closer, with the Core 5 120UL ahead by 5% (26311 versus 25070). Integer math stays with the i7-10750H by a narrow 4.2% margin (39730 versus 38060), and the multithread PassMark score favors the i7-10750H by 9.1% (11616 versus 10558).

The overall average benchmark scores place the Core 5 120UL at 13594 and the Core i7-10750H at 13024, an interesting inversion given the head-to-head results. Both processors sit at the 68th percentile against all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 120UL's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494 (0.7% behind), the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13492 (0.8% behind), and the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13452 (1.1% behind), while the Intel Core 3 304 sits 1.1% ahead at 13745. The Core i7-10750H's nearest rivals cluster tightly: the Intel Core i5-9400F at 13041 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL at 13061 (0.3% behind), and the Intel Core i5-8500 at 13142 (0.9% behind), with the Intel Core i3-1210U 1.8% behind at 12795.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core i7-10750H wins 13 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core 5 120UL wins 4.

Q: Where does the Intel Core 5 120UL show its largest advantage?

A: The largest advantage for the Core 5 120UL is in data encryption, where it scores 7685 versus 3930, a 95.5% lead over the Core i7-10750H.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multicore performance?

A: The Core i7-10750H scores 9718 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the Core 5 120UL scores 8974, giving the i7-10750H a 7.7% advantage.

Q: What is the single largest margin in either direction across all tests?

A: The largest margin is the 50.3% lead for the Core i7-10750H in PassMark extended instructions, where it scores 10470 against 5203 for the Core 5 120UL.

Q: Do the two processors have similar overall benchmark averages?

A: The Core 5 120UL has an average benchmark score of 13594, while the Core i7-10750H averages 13024. Both sit at the 68th percentile against all CPUs.

Q: Which processor leads in PassMark single-thread performance?

A: The Core i7-10750H leads with a PassMark single-thread score of 2625, compared to 2080 for the Core 5 120UL, a 20.8% advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and manufacturing processes. The Intel Core 5 120UL is built on Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, fabricated on Intel's 10 nm process node. The Intel Core i7-10750H uses Comet Lake architecture with the Comet Lake-H codename, built on a 14 nm process node. Both chips come from Intel's foundry.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Core 5 120UL packs 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core i7-10750H has 6 cores and 12 threads. This means the Core 5 120UL relies on a higher core count with fewer threads per core, whereas the i7-10750H uses hyper-threading across all six cores to reach its 12-thread count.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 5 120UL has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core i7-10750H has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, also with 12 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L2 allocation on the Core 5 120UL reflects its newer architecture, though total L3 cache capacity is identical at 12 MB.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Core i7-10750H supports only DDR4, also dual-channel. The i7-10750H has a recorded memory bandwidth figure of 46.9 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure is recorded for the Core 5 120UL. PCIe capabilities differ: the Core 5 120UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Core i7-10750H provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics distinguish the two as well. The Core 5 120UL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the Core i7-10750H ships with UHD Graphics. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The core count difference is the most prominent specification gap: 10 cores for the Core 5 120UL versus 6 cores for the Core i7-10750H. Both support 12 threads. Base clocks differ notably, with the Core 5 120UL running at 1.30 GHz and the Core i7-10750H at 2.60 GHz. Boost clocks reverse the relationship partially: the Core 5 120UL boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the Core i7-10750H reaches 5.00 GHz.

Thermal design power differs by a factor of three. The Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Core i7-10750H is rated at 45 watts. Socket compatibility is entirely different: the Core 5 120UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core i7-10750H uses Intel BGA 1440, meaning they are not interchangeable in any system.

Process nodes differ as expected from the architecture gap: 10 nm for the Core 5 120UL versus 14 nm for the Core i7-10750H. The Core 5 120UL is classified as a desktop segment processor, while the Core i7-10750H is a mobile segment chip. Release dates are separated by four years, with the Core i7-10750H launching in April 2020 and the Core 5 120UL arriving in April 2024. The Core i7-10750H carries the part number SRH8Q, while the Core 5 120UL has an unknown part number. Both processors remain in active production.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-10750H dominates rendering and general productivity workloads. Its Cinebench wins across R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multicore tests, make it the clear choice for CPU-bound rendering tasks. The PassMark data compression result amplifies this, with the i7-10750H scoring 34.8% higher than the Core 5 120UL. Extended instructions performance, where the i7-10750H leads by 50.3%, suggests advantages in workloads that leverage advanced instruction sets. Random string sorting favors the i7-10750H by 36.4%, indicating strength in data manipulation and sorting tasks. The 20.8% single-thread advantage also positions the i7-10750H ahead for lightly threaded applications that depend on raw clock speed.

The Intel Core 5 120UL wins in specific computational niches. Data encryption performance stands out dramatically, with a 95.5% advantage that suggests architectural efficiencies in cryptographic workloads. Prime number finding favors the Core 5 120UL by 20.5%, pointing to strength in certain integer-heavy algorithmic tasks. Physics calculations show a 15.3% edge, and floating point math adds a smaller 5% advantage. These wins, while fewer in number, are meaningful for workloads that stress these particular operations. The significantly lower TDP of 15 watts versus 45 watts also positions the Core 5 120UL as the more power-conscious option, though the database does not include direct power consumption measurements.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward recommendation for most users. The Intel Core i7-10750H is the stronger overall performer, winning 13 of 17 head-to-head tests and holding decisive leads in rendering, compression, extended instructions, and single-thread workloads. Its 5.00 GHz boost clock and 2.60 GHz base clock, combined with 6 cores and 12 threads, deliver consistent advantages across the Cinebench suite and most PassMark tests. The 7.7% to 8% margins in Cinebench tests are stable and reproducible across all three versions of the benchmark, indicating a dependable performance edge in CPU rendering.

The Intel Core 5 120UL appeals to a narrower set of use cases. Its 95.5% encryption advantage and 20.5% prime number lead make it interesting for cryptographic workloads and specific algorithmic tasks. The 15.3% physics win and 5% floating point advantage add to its niche appeal. Its 10 cores and 12 threads, combined with a 15 watt TDP, suggest efficiency advantages that the benchmark data does not directly capture, but the recorded performance figures show it trailing in most general-purpose tests.

Users prioritizing rendering performance, compression work, or single-thread responsiveness should select the Intel Core i7-10750H. Users with workloads centered on encryption, prime number computation, or physics calculations may find the Intel Core 5 120UL more suitable. Both processors sit at the 68th percentile against all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are close enough that the choice should hinge on workload characteristics rather than overall capability. The i7-10750H's consistency across the widest range of tests makes it the safer default recommendation from the recorded data.