Intel Core 5 120UL vs Intel Core i9-14901E Comparison

The Intel Core 5 120UL and the Intel Core i9-14901E occupy very different positions within the same Raptor Lake family. Both processors share a 10 nm Intel process node and an LGA 1700 socket, but the benchmark data shows a decisive performance separation. The Core i9-14901E wins every single recorded comparison, 17 out of 17 head-to-head tests, while the Core 5 120UL offers a much lower power envelope and a different feature set. The data confirms that these are not competitors in the traditional sense; they are two distinct tiers of desktop silicon with different design priorities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most immediate observation from the recorded data is the scale of the performance gap. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core i9-14901E scores 25,753 points, while the Intel Core 5 120UL scores 8,974 points. The difference is 65.2 percent in favor of the i9-14901E. That same 65.2 percent delta appears across Cinebench R15 multi-core (2,595 vs 904), Cinebench R20 multi-core (10,816 vs 3,769), and Cinebench R23 single-core (3,635 vs 1,266). The consistency of the percentage gap, exactly 65.2 percent in all three Cinebench multi-core tests and all three single-core tests, suggests a fixed architectural and clock advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

Single-thread performance follows the same pattern. The Core i9-14901E records 366 points in Cinebench R15 single-core against 127 points for the Core 5 120UL, again a 65.3 percent deficit for the smaller chip. In Cinebench R20 single-core, 1,526 against 531, and in PassMark single-thread, 4,354 against 2,080, the i9-14901E leads by 52.2 percent. The single-thread PassMark gap is the smallest margin in the entire dataset, but it remains a substantial lead.

The PassMark suite shows the widest margins in specialized workloads. The Core i9-14901E leads by 75.1 percent in the find prime numbers test (189 vs 47), by 73.5 percent in physics (3,041 vs 807), and by 69.8 percent in extended instructions (17,249 vs 5,203). Floating point math shows a 67.6 percent advantage (81,089 vs 26,311), and integer math sits at 66.2 percent (112,736 vs 38,060). Data compression, a test that often rewards memory bandwidth and cache, shows a 62.2 percent lead (288,777 vs 109,090). The smallest gap in the PassMark group is data encryption at 58.6 percent (18,571 vs 7,685), but the i9-14901E still dominates.

Random string sorting shows 39,138 against 13,610, a 65.2 percent margin, and PassMark multi-thread shows 30,298 against 10,558, also 65.2 percent. Every one of the 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks lands in the same direction. The Core 5 120UL has zero wins in the dataset.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 120UL does not win any benchmark in the database, so the useful question is where it comes closest to the i9-14901E and where its design makes sense. The smallest recorded deficit is 52.2 percent in PassMark single-thread, which indicates that the single-core gap, while large, is the narrowest point of comparison. The largest deficit is 75.1 percent in prime number calculation, a workload that is extremely sensitive to both clock speed and cache capacity.

The Core 5 120UL is a 15 W processor with 10 cores and 12 threads. Its base clock is 1.30 GHz with a boost of 4.60 GHz. That power envelope is drastically lower than the 65 W of the i9-14901E, and the data reflects the trade-off. The 120UL remains in the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13,594. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13,494 (0.7 percent slower), the Intel Core 3 N355 at 13,492 (0.8 percent slower), and the Intel Core i5-9500 at 13,452 (1.1 percent slower). It also sits 1.1 percent ahead of the Intel Core 3 304 at 13,745. The 120UL is competitive within its own power class, even though it trails the i9-14901E by a wide margin.

The Core i9-14901E is the clear winner in every recorded test, and its average benchmark score of 37,911 places it in the 86th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 at 37,904 (0.0 percent difference), the AMD Ryzen 7 9700X at 37,943 (0.1 percent slower), and the Intel Core 5 211E at 37,829 (0.2 percent slower). The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P132 sits 0.3 percent behind at 37,804. This places the i9-14901E at the very top of its immediate competitive cluster, with no rival in its nearest group posting a positive delta against it.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use the Raptor Lake architecture on a 10 nm Intel process, but they diverge in core configuration and cache layout. The Core 5 120UL uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the i9-14901E uses Raptor Lake-R, a refresh variant. The 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. The thread count difference reflects the hybrid core design: the 120UL's core mix produces fewer threads per core, while the i9-14901E delivers two threads per core across all 8 cores.

Cache capacity is a major differentiator. The Core 5 120UL carries 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The i9-14901E also uses 80 KB of L1 per core but doubles the L2 to 2 MB per core and triples the shared L3 to 36 MB. The 36 MB L3 advantage is directly visible in the data compression and prime number tests, where larger working sets benefit from the additional cache. The i9-14901E also has a larger die at 257 mm², while the 120UL does not have a recorded die size in the database.

Clock speeds show the expected hierarchy. The 120UL operates at 1.30 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The i9-14901E operates at 2.80 GHz base and 5.60 GHz boost. The higher boost clock is the primary driver behind the single-core benchmark results. The i9-14901E also has ECC memory support, while the 120UL does not, and the i9-14901E supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes against the 120UL's PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. Both chips support DDR4 and DDR5 memory over dual-channel buses.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 120UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the i9-14901E uses UHD Graphics 770. The 120UL's integrated GPU is aimed at more capable graphics output for a low-power part, while the i9-14901E pairs a more modest iGPU with far stronger CPU performance. The i9-14901E's die size of 257 mm² is the only physical dimension recorded in the database, and it reflects the larger cache and additional silicon for the higher core count.

The market segment for both is desktop, and both are listed as Active production parts. The 120UL was released on 2024-04-07, while the i9-14901E followed on 2024-06-30. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP in the database. Both have locked multipliers, meaning no unlocked overclocking support.

The Verdict

The data supports an unambiguous conclusion: the Intel Core i9-14901E is the superior processor in every benchmark recorded. It wins all 17 head-to-head tests, holds an 86th percentile ranking, and delivers at least a 52.2 percent advantage in every workload. The Core 5 120UL, by contrast, records zero wins and sits in the 68th percentile. For any workload where raw performance is the primary requirement, the i9-14901E is the only choice between these two.

The Core 5 120UL still has a defensible position in the desktop market, but it is defined by its 15 W power envelope rather than its performance. It remains competitive with its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core i3-12100F and Intel Core 3 N355, with performance deltas under 1.1 percent. Its 12 MB L3 cache, lower clock speeds, and PCIe Gen 4 support mark it as a low-power part for systems where thermals and energy consumption outweigh throughput. The 120UL is a 68th percentile processor that sits close to several other mid-range parts, while the i9-14901E sits near the top of its rival cluster with no negative deltas in its nearest group.

The i9-14901E's 36 MB L3 cache, 5.60 GHz boost clock, and ECC memory support give it a feature set that the 120UL cannot match. The 8-core, 16-thread configuration outperforms the 10-core, 12-thread setup in every test, which indicates that the i9-14901E's higher per-core performance and larger cache matter more than the 120UL's additional cores. The 120UL has more cores but fewer threads, and the benchmark data shows that the i9-14901E's design wins across the board.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i9-14901E wins with a score of 25,753 against 8,974 for the Intel Core 5 120UL, a 65.2 percent advantage.

Q: What is the smallest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The smallest gap is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core i9-14901E scores 4,354 against 2,080 for the Core 5 120UL, a 52.2 percent lead.

Q: How does the cache compare between the two chips?

A: The Core 5 120UL has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Core i9-14901E also has 80 KB of L1 per core, but 2 MB of L2 per core and 36 MB of shared L3.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 over dual-channel memory buses. Only the Core i9-14901E supports ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Core i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core i9-14901E boosts to 5.60 GHz, while the Core 5 120UL boosts to 4.60 GHz.