Intel Core 5 120UL vs Intel Core i7-8750H Comparison

The Intel Core 5 120UL is the better all-around processor in this comparison, winning 12 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark matchups against the Intel Core i7-8750H, with particularly large margins in encryption, prime-number finding, and physics workloads. The Core i7-8750H, however, retains decisive advantages in three specific PassMark workloads—data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting—plus a narrow single-thread win, making it the specialist for those tasks. Both chips share the same 68th percentile ranking among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are close (13,868 for the i7-8750H vs. 13,594 for the Core 5 120UL), but the Core 5 120UL’s broader consistency across Cinebench and most PassMark tests gives it the overall edge.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in this comparison is PassMark data encryption, where the Core 5 120UL scores 7,685 versus the i7-8750H’s 3,388—a 55.9% advantage that is the largest delta in either direction. This is not a marginal win; it suggests the newer architecture handles cryptographic workloads with far greater efficiency. Similarly, in PassMark find prime numbers, the Core 5 120UL posts 47 versus 27, a 42.6% lead, and in PassMark physics it scores 807 against 604, a 25.2% advantage. These are the kinds of compute-heavy tasks where the Core 5 120UL’s 10 cores and higher boost clock (4.60 GHz vs. 4.10 GHz) translate into substantial real-world gains.

Across the Cinebench suite, the Core 5 120UL wins every single test by a remarkably consistent margin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 904 versus 834 (7.7% ahead), and in single-core it posts 127 versus 117 (7.9% ahead). The pattern repeats in R20 (3,769 vs. 3,475 multi-core, 531 vs. 490 single-core) and R23 (8,974 vs. 8,274 multi-core, 1,266 vs. 1,168 single-core), with deltas hovering between 7.7% and 7.9%. This uniformity indicates a steady architectural efficiency improvement rather than a workload-specific fluke.

The Core 5 120UL also wins PassMark floating point math (26,311 vs. 22,179, a 15.7% lead), integer math (38,060 vs. 35,629, a 6.4% lead), and the overall multi-thread score (10,558 vs. 9,799, a 7.2% lead). Its PassMark single-thread score, however, is lower than the i7-8750H’s: 2,080 versus 2,276, a 9.4% deficit. This is a notable reversal, as the Core 5 120UL wins all Cinebench single-core tests but loses the PassMark single-thread test, indicating that benchmark-specific instruction mixes favor different designs.

The i7-8750H’s wins are concentrated and large. In PassMark data compression, it scores 139,418 versus 109,090—a 27.8% blowout that suggests its older microarchitecture has a particular strength in compression algorithms. In PassMark extended instructions, it posts 8,637 versus 5,203, a 66% lead that is the largest single advantage in the entire comparison. And in PassMark random string sorting, it wins 18,622 versus 13,610, a 36.8% margin. These three wins, plus the two identical single-thread PassMark entries (2,276 vs. 2,080, both 9.4% leads), account for the i7-8750H’s five total victories.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 120UL dominates in rendering and general productivity workloads. Its Cinebench victories across all three versions (R15, R20, R23) in both multi-core and single-core tests indicate that it is the better choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and any software that relies on Cinebench-style ray tracing or OpenGL performance. The consistent ~7.8% margin in multi-core tests aligns with its higher thread count capability and newer Raptor Lake architecture, which delivers better instructions-per-clock. For physics simulations, the 25.2% lead in PassMark physics makes it the clear pick for gaming physics or scientific computing that uses rigid-body dynamics.

The Core 5 120UL also excels in encryption-heavy workloads, as evidenced by its 55.9% lead in PassMark data encryption, and in prime-number calculations (42.6% lead), which are relevant for cryptography, hashing, and certain mathematical modeling tasks. Its floating-point math advantage (15.7%) further cements its position for scientific and engineering applications that rely on FPU throughput.

The i7-8750H is the specialist for compression and string manipulation. The 27.8% lead in data compression makes it the better option for file archiving, backup software, or database compression where zlib or similar algorithms are used. The 66% lead in extended instructions is extraordinary and suggests it handles SIMD-heavy or specialized instruction sets far more effectively—think audio/video codecs that use AVX or SSE extensions. Its 36.8% win in random string sorting points to strengths in text processing, log analysis, or any workload that involves heavy string comparison. The i7-8750H also wins the PassMark single-thread test by 9.4%, which could matter for older single-threaded applications that don’t scale across cores.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The i7-8750H is a Coffee Lake-H mobile chip built on Intel’s 14 nm process, with a die size of 149 mm². It features 6 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, all within a 45 W TDP. Its cache layout is 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. It uses the Intel BGA 1440 socket, supports DDR4 memory, and integrates UHD 630 graphics. This is a 2018-era part, now end-of-life, designed for high-performance laptops.

The Core 5 120UL is a Raptor Lake-PS desktop chip on Intel’s 10 nm process, with a smaller node but no listed die size. It packs 10 cores and 12 threads—a hybrid configuration that explains its higher multi-thread scores despite fewer threads than a pure 12-core design. Its base clock is much lower at 1.30 GHz, but the boost clock reaches 4.60 GHz, which is 0.50 GHz higher than the i7-8750H’s peak. The TDP is dramatically lower at 15 W, making it far more power-efficient. Its cache is larger per core: 80 KB L1, 1.25 MB L2, and 12 MB shared L3, matching the i7-8750H’s L3 but with more L2 per core. It uses the Intel Socket 1700, supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel bus, and integrates Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. It also offers PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), whereas the i7-8750H has no listed PCIe specification.

The architectural gulf is clear: the i7-8750H is a high-TDP, older-node mobile part with fewer cores, while the Core 5 120UL is a low-TDP, newer-node desktop part with more cores and a higher boost clock. The Core 5 120UL’s lower base clock (1.30 GHz vs. 2.20 GHz) is likely offset by its higher boost capability and more efficient 10 nm process, which explains why it wins most benchmarks despite starting from a lower idle frequency. The i7-8750H’s larger die and older process contribute to its higher power draw but also appear to give it an edge in specific instruction-heavy workloads like extended instructions and data compression.

The Verdict

The data points decisively to the Core 5 120UL for most users. It wins 12 of 17 benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests, all but one PassMark math test, and the overall multi-thread score. Its 55.9% encryption lead and 42.6% prime-number lead are not minor; they indicate a fundamental architectural superiority for modern compute tasks. The 15 W TDP versus 45 W means it delivers this performance at one-third the power draw, which is a massive efficiency advantage—though the fact pack does not list power consumption as a benchmark, the TDP figures are explicit. For rendering, physics, math, and general multi-threaded productivity, the Core 5 120UL is the clear winner.

The i7-8750H is the pick only if your workload is dominated by data compression, extended instruction sets, or random string sorting. Its 27.8% compression lead and 66% extended-instructions lead are decisive, and its 9.4% single-thread win in PassMark could matter for legacy software. However, these are niche use cases; for the vast majority of tasks, the Core 5 120UL’s consistent 7-8% gains in Cinebench and its massive wins in encryption and physics make it the better all-round choice. Both chips sit at the same 68th percentile, but the Core 5 120UL does so with a lower TDP, newer architecture, and more cores. If you must choose based on benchmark data alone, the Core 5 120UL is the superior processor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-8750H has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 13,868 compared to the Intel Core 5 120UL’s 13,594, a difference of about 2%.

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

A: The Core 5 120UL scores 8,974 versus the i7-8750H’s 8,274, putting it 7.8% ahead.

Q: Does the i7-8750H win any benchmark by a large margin?

A: Yes, it wins PassMark extended instructions by 66% (8,637 vs. 5,203) and PassMark data compression by 27.8% (139,418 vs. 109,090).

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i7-8750H has a 45 W TDP, while the Core 5 120UL has a 15 W TDP—a 30 W difference favoring the Core 5 120UL in power efficiency.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Core 5 120UL has 10 cores versus the i7-8750H’s 6 cores, though both have 12 threads.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The i7-8750H supports DDR4 only, while the Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-8750H | Intel Core 5 120UL |

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

| Cores | 6 | 10 |

| Threads | 12 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.20 GHz | 1.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.10 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Coffee Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Coffee Lake-H | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | 149 mm² | Not listed |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Not listed | Dual-channel |

| PCIe | Not listed | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD 630 | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2018-04-01 | 2024-04-07 |

| Part Number | SR3YY | Unknown |