Intel Core 5 120UL vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Intel Core 5 120UL and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100. The Intel chip has a full set of recorded measurements, while the Qualcomm part has no benchmark entries in the database. This makes a direct score-by-score comparison impossible from the recorded data.

What the data does show is the Intel Core 5 120UL’s measured performance across multiple test suites. In Cinebench R23, it scores 8974 points in multi-core and 1266 points in single-core. The R20 run shows 3769 multi-core and 531 single-core, while R15 records 904 multi-core and 127 single-core. PassMark results include 10558 in multithread, 2080 in single-thread, 38060 in integer math, 26311 in floating point math, and 109090 in data compression. The encryption test records 7685, extended instructions 5203, and random string sorting 13610. Physics scores 807, and prime number finding scores 47.

Since the Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has no benchmark scores in the database, the percentile ranking tells the only comparative story available. The Intel part sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs, while the Qualcomm part is at the 50th percentile. That gap indicates the Intel chip outperforms a larger share of the overall CPU pool in the database’s aggregate measurements, but it does not quantify the margin between these two specific processors.

The Intel Core 5 120UL’s nearest rivals in the database are all Intel parts: the Core i3-12100F with an average score of 13494 and a delta of 0.7%, the Core 3 N355 at 13492 with a 0.8% delta, the Core i5-9500 at 13452 with a 1.1% delta, and the Core 3 304 at 13745 with a -1.1% delta. The Intel Core 5 120UL’s own average benchmark score is 13594. These deltas show the Core 5 120UL sits within roughly one percent of all four nearest rivals, ahead of three of them and behind only the Core 3 304 by 1.1%.

For the Snapdragon X1E-84-100, the absence of benchmark entries and nearest rivals in the database means no score-based comparison can be made against the Intel chip or any other processor. The only quantitative performance signal is its 50th percentile placement, which is below the Intel part’s 68th percentile.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only one of these two processors with measurable performance. It delivers a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark scores, occupies the 68th percentile of all CPUs, and holds an average benchmark score of 13594. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has no benchmark scores, no nearest rivals, and an average benchmark score of zero in the database, placing it at the 50th percentile by default rather than by demonstrated performance.

For workloads that rely on multi-threaded throughput, the Intel part’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8974 and PassMark multithread score of 10558 provide concrete reference points. For single-thread responsiveness, the R23 single-core score of 1266 and PassMark single-thread score of 2080 serve as the available metrics. The Qualcomm chip offers no comparable numbers, so any performance claim for it cannot be substantiated from this database.

The Intel Core 5 120UL also benefits from a higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus the Snapdragon’s 4.20 GHz, although the Snapdragon has a higher base clock of 3.80 GHz versus 1.30 GHz. The Intel chip uses 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Snapdragon uses 12 cores and 12 threads, meaning the Qualcomm part has more physical cores but no additional threads beyond its core count.

Who should pick which comes down to data availability and platform context. The Intel part is a desktop processor with a 15 W TDP, Intel Socket 1700, and Raptor Lake architecture. The Snapdragon is a mobile processor with a 35 W TDP, Qualcomm BGA 2073 socket, and Oryon codename. The Intel chip has measured scores to rely on; the Qualcomm chip does not. The database supports the Intel part as the one with demonstrated benchmark performance and a higher percentile ranking.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 120UL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel’s 10 nm process node at Intel’s foundry. It belongs to the Core 5 generation and targets the desktop market segment. The Snapdragon X1E-84-100 uses the Oryon codename under the Snapdragon X Elite generation, built on TSMC’s 4 nm process node. Its manufacturer is listed as unknown in the database, and it targets the mobile market segment.

The process node difference is significant: 10 nm for Intel versus 4 nm for TSMC. The smaller node typically allows for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency, but the database does not include transistor counts or die sizes for either part, so no quantitative efficiency comparison is possible.

Cache structures differ substantially. The Intel chip provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Snapdragon provides 288 KB of L1 per core, 12 MB of L2 per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has a larger shared L3 pool, while the Qualcomm part has much larger per-core L1 and per-module L2 allocations.

The integrated graphics differ as well. Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units, while Qualcomm uses the Adreno X1-85. The database provides no benchmark scores for either GPU, so relative graphics performance cannot be assessed from the recorded data.

The Intel chip supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Snapdragon supports LPDDR5X in a dual-channel configuration with a recorded memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s. The Intel part has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database.

Core and thread counts: Intel has 10 cores and 12 threads. Qualcomm has 12 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part therefore has hyper-threading-like thread expansion, while the Qualcomm part does not add threads beyond its physical cores.

Clock speeds: Intel has a 1.30 GHz base clock and a 4.60 GHz boost clock. Qualcomm has a 3.80 GHz base clock and a 4.20 GHz boost clock. The Intel chip boosts higher, but the Qualcomm chip runs at a much higher base frequency.

Power: Intel has a 15 W TDP. Qualcomm has a 35 W TDP. The Qualcomm part draws more than double the thermal design power.

Socket and platform: Intel uses Intel Socket 1700. Qualcomm uses Qualcomm BGA 2073. These are incompatible platforms.

Process node and foundry: Intel uses a 10 nm node at Intel’s foundry. Qualcomm uses a 4 nm node at TSMC.

Cache: Intel provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. Qualcomm provides 288 KB L1 per core, 12 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB shared L3.

Memory support: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Qualcomm supports LPDDR5X only. Intel has no recorded memory bandwidth; Qualcomm has 135.2 GB/s.

PCIe: Intel offers Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. Qualcomm offers Gen 4 with 12 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics: Intel has Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Qualcomm has Adreno X1-85.

Market segment: Intel is desktop. Qualcomm is mobile.

Release dates: Intel was released on 2024-04-07. Qualcomm was released on 2024-04-23.

Part number: Intel’s is unknown. Qualcomm’s is X1E84100.

Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has a boost clock of 4.20 GHz.

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has 12 cores, while the Intel Core 5 120UL has 10 cores. Both have 12 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL has a TDP of 15 W, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has a TDP of 35 W.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, neither processor supports ECC memory.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 supports LPDDR5X in a dual-channel configuration with a memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking in the database?

A: The Intel Core 5 120UL ranks at the 68th percentile of all CPUs, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 ranks at the 50th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 120UL wins in every category where the database contains measured performance. It has benchmark scores across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, plus multiple PassMark tests. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 has no benchmark entries at all, so it cannot claim a single measured performance win from the recorded data.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Intel chip’s Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8974 and PassMark multithread score of 10558 give it a demonstrated capability. For single-threaded tasks, its R23 single-core score of 1266 and PassMark single-thread score of 2080 provide reference points. The Qualcomm part offers no comparable numbers.

The Intel part also wins on boost clock, with 4.60 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. It has a lower TDP at 15 W versus 35 W, which means lower thermal design power for desktop integration. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Qualcomm part is limited to LPDDR5X. Its 12 MB shared L3 cache is double the Qualcomm part’s 6 MB shared L3.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-84-100 wins on specifications that the database records without benchmark validation. It has 12 cores versus 10, a higher base clock at 3.80 GHz versus 1.30 GHz, a smaller 4 nm process node versus Intel’s 10 nm, a larger 288 KB L1 per core versus 80 KB, a larger 12 MB L2 per module versus 1.25 MB per core, a higher memory bandwidth at 135.2 GB/s versus no recorded figure, and more PCIe lanes at 12 versus 8. It also has a newer release date by 2024-04-23 versus 2024-04-07.

For a builder relying solely on this database, the Intel Core 5 120UL is the only processor with measurable performance data. The Qualcomm part’s specification advantages in core count, process node, cache per core, memory bandwidth, and PCIe lanes exist in the spec sheet but are not backed by any benchmark scores. The Intel part’s 68th percentile ranking versus the Qualcomm part’s 50th percentile further separates the two in the database’s aggregate view.

The practical split is clear: the Intel chip wins every measurable performance category and offers lower power, higher boost clocks, and a desktop socket. The Qualcomm chip wins on paper specifications related to process node, core count, base clock, per-core cache, memory bandwidth, PCIe lanes, and mobile market targeting, but the database contains no evidence of how those specifications translate into actual performance.