Intel Core 5 120UL vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus Comparison

The Intel Core 5 120UL and the Intel Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus represent two entirely different corners of the Intel product stack. The data shows a 17 to 0 sweep in head-to-head benchmarks for the Core Ultra 7, with the Core 5 120UL trailing by margins between 56.3% and 90.2% across all recorded tests. The Core 5 120UL is a low-power desktop part based on the Raptor Lake architecture, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a high-end mobile processor built on Arrow Lake-HX Refresh silicon. Their respective percentile placements, 68th versus 93rd among all CPUs, confirm the substantial performance gap, but the architectural and specification differences explain exactly why the Core Ultra 7 dominates.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus delivers significantly higher multi-core performance. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 41913 compared to 8974 for the Core 5 120UL, a 78.6% advantage. The PassMark multithread score also shows a 78.1% gap, with 48270 versus 10558.

Q: How much of a lead does the Core Ultra 7 have in single-core performance?

A: The single-core advantage is consistent but slightly smaller than the multi-core gap. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 7 scores 5917 against 1266, a 78.6% difference. PassMark single-thread results show a 56.3% lead, with 4764 versus 2080.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Core Ultra 7 also has a higher base clock of 2.40 GHz versus 1.30 GHz, and a higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is fabricated on a 3 nm process at TSMC, while the Core 5 120UL uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 7 also integrates 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, whereas the Core 5 120UL does not have listed transistor or die size data.

Q: How does the integrated graphics compare between the two chips?

A: The Core 5 120UL features Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core Ultra 7 has fewer execution units but is paired with a much faster CPU complex.

Q: What memory and PCIe support differs between the two?

A: The Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports DDR5 only. The Core Ultra 7 offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, whereas the Core 5 120UL is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes.

Architecture Differences

The Core 5 120UL belongs to the Raptor Lake-PS generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process. It uses the Raptor Lake architecture with a desktop market segment, fitting into the Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus is a fundamentally different design, belonging to the Core Ultra Series 2 with the Arrow Lake-HX Refresh codename. It is manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process, a notable shift from Intel's in-house fabrication for the Core 5.

The transistor counts reflect the architectural leap. The Core Ultra 7 packs 17,800 million transistors across a 243 mm² die, while the Core 5 120UL has no listed transistor or die size data. The cache hierarchy also scales substantially: 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 Ultra 7 doubles the L1 to 192 KB per core, increases L2 to 3 MB per core, and expands shared L3 to 30 MB. These larger caches directly support the Core Ultra 7's higher throughput in data-heavy workloads.

The memory controller differs as well. The Core 5 120UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, but the database does not record a memory bandwidth figure. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The PCIe implementation is another differentiator: the Core 5 120UL uses Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 uses Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, providing more headroom for high-speed peripherals.

The Core Ultra 7 also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Core 5 120UL is locked. The integrated graphics differ, with the Core 5 using Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units and the Core Ultra 7 using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core Ultra 7's transistor count, larger caches, and newer process node all point to a more complex and capable design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus wins every recorded benchmark, but the magnitude of the wins varies by workload. The largest gap appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 7 scores 482 against 47, a 90.2% deficit for the Core 5 120UL. This test heavily favors raw integer throughput and the Core Ultra 7's higher core count and clock speed.

The extended instructions test shows the second-largest margin at 86.8%, with the Core Ultra 7 scoring 39283 versus 5203. Floating-point math also shows a wide gap: 163567 versus 26311, a difference of 83.9%. The physics test follows with a 79% deficit, scoring 3843 versus 807. These results indicate the Core Ultra 7's advantage scales with the complexity and parallelizability of the workload.

The Cinebench suite shows remarkably consistent deltas. All six Cinebench tests, R15, R20, and R23 in both multi-core and single-core variants, record a 78.6% or 78.7% difference in favor of the Core Ultra 7. The multi-core scores are 4224, 17603, and 41913 for the Core Ultra 7 against 904, 3769, and 8974 for the Core 5 120UL. Single-core scores are 596, 2485, and 5917 against 127, 531, and 1266. This consistency suggests the per-core performance advantage is uniform across the entire processor.

Data encryption shows a 79.7% gap, with 37813 versus 7685. Data compression trails slightly at 77.9%, scoring 493179 versus 109090. Random string sorting shows a 77.3% difference, with 60020 versus 13610. The multithread benchmark records a 78.1% gap, scoring 48270 versus 10558. The smallest relative difference appears in PassMark single-thread tests, where the Core Ultra 7 leads by 56.3%, scoring 4764 versus 2080.

The overall average benchmark scores reflect this dominance: the Core Ultra 7 averages 61834, while the Core 5 120UL averages 13594. The Core Ultra 7's nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-13900KF with an average score of 61841 and a delta of 0%, placing it in the top tier of desktop processors. The Core 5 120UL's nearest rival is the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494 with a 0.7% delta, placing it in the mid-range of the database.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ substantially: the Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus has 20 cores and 20 threads. The clock speeds also favor the Core Ultra 7, with a base clock of 2.40 GHz versus 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

The thermal design power shows a large gap: the Core 5 120UL is rated at 15 watts, while the Core Ultra 7 is rated at 55 watts. This power difference aligns with their market segments, with the Core 5 being a desktop part and the Core Ultra 7 being a mobile part, though the Core Ultra 7 consumes more power for substantially higher performance.

The sockets are incompatible: the Core 5 120UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 7 uses Intel BGA 2114. The process node differs, with 10 nm for the Core 5 and 3 nm for the Core Ultra 7. The foundry also differs, with Intel manufacturing the Core 5 and TSMC manufacturing the Core Ultra 7.

The cache specifications diverge across all levels. The Core 5 has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 7 has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 30 MB shared L3. The transistor count and die size are only listed for the Core Ultra 7: 17,800 million transistors and 243 mm².

Memory support differs, with the Core 5 supporting DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 supports DDR5 only. The memory bandwidth is listed only for the Core Ultra 7 at 102.4 GB/s. The PCIe configuration shows the Core 5 with Gen 4 and 8 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 has Gen 5 and 20 lanes. The Core 5 uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while the Core Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 and unlocked on the Core Ultra 7.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the performance hierarchy unambiguous. The Core Ultra 7 270HX Plus leads the Core 5 120UL in every single benchmark, with deltas ranging from 56.3% in single-thread tests to 90.2% in prime number finding. The Core Ultra 7's average benchmark score of 61834 places it at the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, with its closest rival being the Intel Core i9-13900KF at 61841. The Core 5 120UL, by contrast, sits at the 68th percentile with an average score of 13594, near the Intel Core i3-12100F at 13494.

The architectural differences explain the performance gap. The Core Ultra 7 uses a 3 nm process with 17,800 million transistors, has double the core count at 20 versus 10, and carries 30 MB of shared L3 versus 12 MB. Its memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and PCIe Gen 5 support with 20 lanes further separate it from the Core 5's DDR4/DDR5 support and PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes.

The Core Ultra 7 is the clear choice for workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput, such as rendering, data compression, and encryption, where it leads by roughly 77% to 80%. Its single-thread advantage is smaller but still decisive at 56.3% in PassMark and 78.6% in Cinebench R23. The Core 5 120UL, with its 15-watt TDP and 10 cores, targets low-power desktop applications, but the data shows it cannot match the Core Ultra 7 in any measured metric.

Users selecting between these processors should base the decision on the platform requirements. The Core 5 120UL fits Intel Socket 1700 desktop boards with DDR4 or DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 requires a BGA 2114 mobile platform with DDR5. The Core Ultra 7's 55-watt TDP and unlocked multiplier indicate a performance-first design, while the Core 5's 15-watt TDP prioritizes efficiency. The benchmark results consistently favor the Core Ultra 7, making it the superior processor for compute-intensive tasks, while the Core 5 120UL remains a viable low-power option within its narrower performance envelope.