Intel Core 5 120UL vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the Intel Core 5 120UL and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty, meaning no shared test scores were recorded across the two processors. However, the Intel Core 5 120UL has a full set of 17 individual benchmark scores, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has none recorded. This asymmetry limits direct comparison to the Intel part's absolute performance figures and its position relative to other CPUs in the database.

The Intel Core 5 120UL delivers a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 8974 and a single-core score of 1266. Its Cinebench R20 results are 3769 multicore and 531 single-core, while Cinebench R15 shows 904 multicore and 127 single-core. These scores place the chip at the 68th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13594.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for the Intel part's standing. The Intel Core i3-12100F sits 0.7% ahead with an average score of 13494, and the Intel Core 3 N355 is 0.8% ahead at 13492. The Intel Core i5-9500 trails by 1.1% with an average score of 13452, while the Intel Core 3 304 leads by 1.1% at 13745. The Intel Core 5 120UL thus sits in a tight cluster where the spread between the nearest four rivals is only about 2.2 percentage points.

PassMark results for the Intel part show strong integer math performance at 38060, floating point math at 26311, and multithreaded workload scoring at 10558. Data compression reaches 109090, while data encryption scores 7685. Extended instructions score 5203, random string sorting hits 13610, and single-thread performance is recorded at 2080. The find prime numbers test returns 47, and physics scoring is 807.

Because the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has no recorded benchmark scores, the database cannot quantify its performance against the Intel Core 5 120UL. The Qualcomm part's percentile rank of 50 is listed, but its average benchmark score of 0 reflects the absence of measured data. Any performance comparison between the two must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than benchmark outcomes.

The Verdict

The data shows that the Intel Core 5 120UL is a fully benchmarked processor with measurable performance across Cinebench and PassMark suites. Its 68th percentile ranking and average score of 13594 place it among mainstream desktop CPUs, slightly behind the Intel Core 3 304 and marginally ahead of the Intel Core i5-9500. Users seeking a processor with verified performance data will find the Intel part well characterized.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 appears in the database with no benchmark scores and no nearest rivals. Its 50th percentile ranking is present, but without measured results, the database cannot confirm its real-world performance. The Qualcomm part is therefore an unknown quantity in terms of empirical testing.

From the recorded data alone, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only chip that can be evaluated for performance. The Qualcomm part's lack of scores means no verdict can be drawn on its speed, efficiency, or workload handling. The Intel chip's benchmark suite covers rendering, compression, encryption, and math workloads, giving a broad picture of its capabilities.

For workloads like multi-threaded rendering, the Intel part's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 8974 indicates solid throughput. Single-thread tasks, as shown by the R23 single-core score of 1266, are also serviceable. The PassMark multithread score of 10558 and single-thread score of 2080 reinforce this profile.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 cannot be recommended or dismissed based on the database. It has a lower percentile ranking of 50, but percentile without scores carries limited weight. The Intel Core 5 120UL, by contrast, has a complete record and a clear position among its nearest rivals.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 120UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. It has 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid configuration of performance and efficiency cores. The cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 uses the Oryon codename, part of the Snapdragon X Elite generation, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It has 12 cores and 12 threads, meaning all cores are symmetric with no hyper-threading. Its cache layout is distinct: 288 KB of L1 per core, 12 MB of L2 per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

The process node difference is substantial. Intel's 10 nm process is older and less dense than TSMC's 4 nm node, which typically allows higher transistor density and better power efficiency. The Qualcomm part's larger L1 cache per core at 288 KB versus 80 KB suggests a design aimed at feeding high-throughput cores, while the Intel part relies on a smaller per-core L1 with a larger shared L3 pool.

The Intel part's 12 MB L3 is double the Qualcomm part's 6 MB L3, which can benefit workloads with shared data access patterns. However, the Qualcomm part's 12 MB L2 per module is substantially larger than Intel's 1.25 MB per core, potentially improving hit rates for per-module workloads.

The integrated graphics differ as well. Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while Qualcomm integrates the Adreno X1-85. Both are suitable for basic display and media tasks, but their architectures are entirely different.

Memory support also diverges. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, while the Qualcomm part uses LPDDR5X with a recorded memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s. The Intel part has no recorded memory bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity shows the Qualcomm part with 12 Gen 4 lanes, while the Intel part has 8 Gen 4 lanes. The Qualcomm part's additional lanes provide more headroom for expansion devices, though the Intel part's desktop socket may offer other connectivity options.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several recorded specifications. The Intel Core 5 120UL has a base clock of 1.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no recorded boost clock.

Thermal design power differs significantly: the Intel part is rated at 15 W TDP, while the Qualcomm part is rated at 35 W TDP. The Qualcomm part consumes more power at its base specification, which aligns with its higher base clock and 12-core configuration.

The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1700, indicating a desktop platform, while the Qualcomm part uses Qualcomm BGA 2073, a mobile soldered package. The market segments reflect this: Intel is classified as Desktop, Qualcomm as Mobile.

The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Qualcomm part supports only LPDDR5X. The Qualcomm part has a recorded memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s; the Intel part has none recorded.

Process node and foundry differ: Intel uses 10 nm at Intel, Qualcomm uses 4 nm at TSMC. The Qualcomm part's part number is X1E78100, while the Intel part's part number is listed as unknown.

Release dates are close: the Intel part was released on 2024-04-07, and the Qualcomm part on 2024-04-23. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Neither processor has a launch MSRP in the database. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both have ECC memory support set to false.

Core counts differ: 10 cores and 12 threads for Intel, 12 cores and 12 threads for Qualcomm. The Intel part's thread count exceeds its core count, indicating hyper-threading, while the Qualcomm part has equal core and thread counts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has 12 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Qualcomm part has two additional cores, but both have the same thread count.

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

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 W, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has a TDP of 35 W. The Qualcomm part is rated for more than double the thermal envelope.

Q: How do their cache configurations compare?

A: The Intel part has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Qualcomm part has 288 KB L1 per core, 12 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB shared L3.

Q: Does the database show any benchmark scores for the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100?

A: No. The Qualcomm part has an empty benchmark array and an average benchmark score of 0. The Intel Core 5 120UL has 17 recorded benchmark scores.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz, compared to the Intel Core 5 120UL's base clock of 1.30 GHz. The Intel part has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Qualcomm part has no recorded boost clock.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL is built on a 10 nm process at Intel, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 120UL wins in the database's recorded benchmarks, as it is the only processor with measured scores. Its Cinebench R23 multicore result of 8974 and single-core result of 1266 provide a baseline for rendering and general responsiveness. The PassMark multithread score of 10558 and single-thread score of 2080 indicate balanced performance across parallel and serial workloads.

The Intel part's 15 W TDP makes it suitable for low-power desktop applications where thermal limits are tight. Its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory offers flexibility in system building, and its Intel Socket 1700 compatibility aligns with a widely available desktop platform. The 12 MB shared L3 cache supports workloads with shared data, such as compression and encryption, where the PassMark data compression score of 109090 and encryption score of 7685 show capability.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 wins on paper specifications that favor mobile deployment. Its 4 nm process at TSMC indicates a more advanced manufacturing technology, which typically enables better power efficiency per operation. The 12 MB L2 per module and 288 KB L1 per core suggest a cache design oriented toward high-bandwidth, low-latency access, potentially benefiting single-threaded responsiveness. The recorded memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s with LPDDR5X support gives it a clear advantage in memory throughput, though no benchmark confirms this in practice.

The Qualcomm part's 12 Gen 4 PCIe lanes exceed the Intel part's 8 Gen 4 lanes, providing more connectivity for NVMe drives or other peripherals. Its 12 cores at a 3.40 GHz base clock indicate a design that maintains high frequency across all cores, unlike the Intel part's lower base clock of 1.30 GHz.

In the absence of Qualcomm benchmark data, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only processor with demonstrated performance. The Qualcomm part's architectural advantages, such as the smaller process node and larger per-core caches, remain theoretical until measured. For users relying on the database's empirical results, the Intel part is the only verifiable option. For users prioritizing specifications like memory bandwidth, core count, and PCIe lanes, the Qualcomm part presents a compelling profile on paper.