Intel Core 5 220H vs Intel Core i5-12600H Comparison

The Intel Core i5-12600H and Intel Core 5 220H are both 12-core, 16-thread mobile processors from Intel, but they represent different design generations. The benchmark data reveals a sharp split: the i5-12600H dominates in Cinebench rendering workloads, while the Core 5 220H counters in the majority of Passmark tests. This head-to-head analysis breaks down where each chip holds a definitive advantage, the architectural reasons behind the split, and the practical implications for different workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Intel Core i5-12600H scores 20072 against the Core 5 220H’s 11198, a massive 79.2% lead. This is not a marginal victory; it is a generational gap in sustained multi-threaded rendering performance. The single-core R23 test tells a similar story, with the i5-12600H scoring 2833 versus 1853, a 52.9% advantage. The gap narrows in older Cinebench versions but remains decisive: in R20 multi-core, the i5-12600H leads by 7.9% (8430 vs 7812), and in R15 multi-core, it is ahead by 10.2% (2023 vs 1835). Single-core results in R20 and R15 also favor the i5-12600H by 7.9% and 8.8%, respectively.

The picture inverts when examining the Passmark suite. The Core 5 220H wins 9 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, though its victories are generally smaller in magnitude than the i5-12600H’s Cinebench wins. The largest Passmark win for the Core 5 220H is in physics, where it scores 1478 versus 1262, a 14.6% advantage. It also shows a 13.4% lead in find prime numbers (82 vs 71). Other wins include integer math (73555 vs 71168, a 3.2% lead), multithread (21884 vs 21128, 3.5%), and random string sorting (28438 vs 27653, 2.8%). The Core 5 220H also edges out the i5-12600H in data encryption (15216 vs 14799, 2.7%), floating point math (51671 vs 51264, 0.8%), and extended instructions (14642 vs 14508, 0.9%). Its lead in data compression is negligible at 0.2% (247921 vs 247404).

The i5-12600H does retain a slim win in Passmark single-thread, scoring 3453 against 3405, a 1.4% margin. This means the i5-12600H holds the single-core crown in both Cinebench and Passmark, but its multi-core advantage is strictly confined to Cinebench’s rendering engine. The overall win count is nearly even: the i5-12600H takes 8 benchmarks, while the Core 5 220H takes 9. However, the magnitude of the i5-12600H’s Cinebench wins is so large that its average benchmark score is higher, at 28882 compared to the Core 5 220H’s 28574. This places the i5-12600H in the 81st percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 220H sits at the 80th.

Where Each One Wins

The data suggests a clear use-case split. The Intel Core i5-12600H is the unequivocal choice for 3D rendering, video encoding, and any workload that leverages the Cinebench engine. Its 79.2% lead in R23 multi-core and 52.9% lead in R23 single-core are not incremental improvements; they represent a fundamentally different level of performance in that specific application. For users running Blender, Cinebench, or similar renderers, the i5-12600H is in a different class.

The Intel Core 5 220H, conversely, shows strength in general-purpose computing tasks. Its wins in integer math, physics, and find prime numbers suggest an advantage in scientific computing, data analysis, and simulation workloads that rely on these primitives. The multithread score of 21884, while only 3.5% higher, indicates that it handles diverse, non-rendering multi-threaded tasks slightly better. The data encryption win (2.7%) and random string sorting win (2.8%) point to a slight edge in database operations and security-related processing. For a user whose primary tasks are office productivity, coding, or running complex spreadsheets, the Core 5 220H’s aggregate Passmark performance makes it a marginally stronger candidate, despite its lower average score.

It is also notably the Core 5 220H’s wins are more consistent across the Passmark suite. It wins 9 out of 14 Passmark tests, while the i5-12600H only wins 5. This suggests the Core 5 220H has a more balanced profile for everyday multitasking, even if it loses decisively in the specialized rendering benchmark.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split explains the performance divergence. The i5-12600H is built on Alder Lake architecture, while the Core 5 220H uses Raptor Lake. Both are fabricated on Intel’s 10 nm process node, but they represent different design philosophies. The i5-12600H’s Alder Lake-H design allocates its L2 cache at 1.25 MB per core, whereas the Core 5 220H’s Raptor Lake-H design increases this to 2 MB per core. This larger L2 cache likely contributes to the Core 5 220H’s wins in data-intensive Passmark tests, as more data can be stored closer to the cores.

Both processors share the same L3 cache size of 18 MB shared and identical L1 cache of 80 KB per core. The core and thread counts are also identical at 12 and 16, respectively. The base clock is the same at 2.70 GHz, but the boost clock differs: the i5-12600H boosts to 4.50 GHz, while the Core 5 220H reaches 4.90 GHz. This higher boost clock on the Core 5 220H should theoretically aid single-thread performance, yet the data shows the i5-12600H wins in Passmark single-thread by 1.4% and by a massive 52.9% in Cinebench R23 single-core. This suggests that the architectural improvements in Alder Lake’s core design have a more significant impact than the raw clock speed increase in Raptor Lake.

The integrated graphics also differ slightly: the i5-12600H features Iris Xe 80EU, while the Core 5 220H has Iris Xe Graphics 80EU. Both are 80 execution unit designs, but the naming suggests a possible revision. The PCIe support is a notable difference. The i5-12600H offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Core 5 220H provides Gen 5 with only 8 lanes (CPU only). This means the i5-12600H has more lanes for peripherals, but the Core 5 220H has access to a newer, faster PCIe standard for its fewer lanes.

Specification Differences

Aside from the architecture and cache differences, several other specifications separate these two processors. The i5-12600H has a die size of 217 mm², while the Core 5 220H’s die size is not listed. The part numbers differ (SRLCZ for the i5-12600H, SRQ6SQ5MM for the Core 5 220H), and the Core 5 220H has a specific release date of December 17, 2024. The i5-12600H’s release date is not provided in the data. The Core 5 220H has a launch MSRP of $342, while the i5-12600H has no listed MSRP. Both processors are active production parts, target the mobile market, have locked multipliers, and do not support ECC memory. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The core, thread, base clock, TDP (45W), and socket (Intel BGA 1744) are all identical.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600H is significantly faster, scoring 20072 compared to the Core 5 220H’s 11198, a 79.2% advantage.

Q: Does the Core 5 220H beat the i5-12600H in any benchmark?

A: Yes. The Core 5 220H wins 9 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, including Passmark physics (1478 vs 1262), find prime numbers (82 vs 71), and integer math (73555 vs 71168).

Q: What are the key architectural differences?

A: The i5-12600H uses Alder Lake architecture with 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Core 5 220H uses Raptor Lake with 2 MB of L2 cache per core. Both have 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 5 220H has a higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz, compared to the i5-12600H’s 4.50 GHz. The base clock is identical at 2.70 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i5-12600H has a higher average benchmark score of 28882, placing it in the 81st percentile. The Core 5 220H has an average score of 28574, placing it in the 80th percentile.

Q: What is the difference in PCIe support?

A: The i5-12600H supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 220H supports the newer PCIe Gen 5 standard but with only 8 lanes (CPU only).