Intel Core i5-12600H vs Intel Core Ultra 5 135H Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H and the Intel Core i5-12600H represent two distinct design philosophies from Intel, separated by a full generation of architecture. The data shows a clear split: the newer Meteor Lake chip dominates synthetic workload tests, while the older Alder Lake part holds a commanding lead in Cinebench rendering. With the Core Ultra 5 135H recording 11 benchmark wins against 6 for the Core i5-12600H, the overall scorecard favors the newcomer, but the magnitude of the losses in key tests tells a more nuanced story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence appears in the Cinebench suite, where the Core i5-12600H delivers a decisive performance advantage. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-12600H scores 20,072 against the Ultra 5 135H’s 11,875.5, a 40.8% delta. This is the single largest margin in the entire comparison. The single-core R23 test follows the same pattern, with the i5-12600H posting 2,833 versus 1,700, a 40% gap. The older chip also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core (2,023 vs 1,718, a 15.1% edge) and single-core (285 vs 244, a 14.4% edge). In Cinebench R20, the margins narrow but remain in favor of the i5-12600H: 8,430 vs 7,834 multi-core and 1,189 vs 1,105 single-core, each a 7.1% difference.

The Core Ultra 5 135H, however, wins every PassMark subtest except none, sweeping all 11 of its victories in that suite. The largest win is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 scores 89 versus 71, a 25.4% advantage. PassMark physics also shows a substantial lead for the Ultra 5 at 1,482 vs 1,262, a 17.4% delta. Floating point math favors the Ultra 5 by 7% (54,867 vs 51,264), and multi-thread performance is 6.1% higher (22,422 vs 21,128). Smaller but consistent wins appear in extended instructions (3.6%), integer math (3.3%), random string sorting (4.8%), data compression (1.7%), data encryption (1.5%), and single-thread tests (2% on both PassMark single-thread variants, scoring 3,521 vs 3,453).

The aggregate benchmark scores reflect this split. The Core Ultra 5 135H has an average benchmark score of 29,093, placing it in the 81st percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 7 5800X, scores 29,123, a negligible 0.1% difference. The Core i5-12600H posts an average of 28,882, also in the 81st percentile, with its closest competitor being the Intel Core i9-13900H at 28,886, a 0% delta. When compared directly to each other, the Ultra 5 135H leads by 0.7% in average score, a margin that falls within the noise of the nearestRivals data.

The Verdict

The benchmark results indicate a clear division of labor. The Intel Core i5-12600H is the superior choice for rendering and heavily threaded CPU workloads that rely on sustained multi-core execution, as evidenced by its 40.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 40% lead in R23 single-core. Any application that scales with Cinebench-style performance will see substantially better results on the Alder Lake chip.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H is the better option for general-purpose computing, data processing, and scientific math tasks. Its 25.4% lead in prime number finding and 17.4% lead in physics simulations suggest a stronger integer and floating-point execution pipeline for non-rendering workloads. The 6.1% advantage in PassMark multi-thread and the 2% lead in single-thread indicate that for everyday multitasking and responsive single-core operations, the Meteor Lake part is slightly ahead.

For a user choosing strictly from the data, the decision hinges on the primary use case. Rendering, 3D modeling, or video encoding that leverages Cinebench-style multi-threading points directly to the Core i5-12600H. Data analysis, scientific computing, compression, encryption, or general productivity with mixed workloads points to the Core Ultra 5 135H. The 0.7% average score difference between the two is effectively a tie, so the specific workload profile is the only meaningful differentiator.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different foundations. The Core Ultra 5 135H uses the Meteor Lake architecture on a 7 nm process node, while the Core i5-12600H uses Alder Lake-H on a 10 nm node, with a die size of 217 mm². The Core Ultra 5 135H packs 14 cores and 18 threads, compared to 12 cores and 16 threads on the Core i5-12600H. Despite having more cores, the Ultra 5 has a lower base clock of 3.60 GHz versus 2.70 GHz and a slightly higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus 4.50 GHz.

Cache configurations differ significantly. The Core Ultra 5 135H has 112 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Core i5-12600H has 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. Both share 18 MB of L3 cache, but the L1 and L2 advantages on the Ultra 5 likely contribute to its PassMark wins in latency-sensitive tasks.

The power envelopes are also distinct. The Core Ultra 5 135H has a TDP of 28 watts, while the Core i5-12600H is rated at 45 watts. This difference explains why the Ultra 5, despite fewer Cinebench points, can deliver competitive or better PassMark scores in a more power-efficient package. The socket changes from Intel BGA 2049 on the Ultra 5 to Intel BGA 1744 on the i5-12600H.

Memory support varies as well. The Core Ultra 5 135H supports DDR5 with memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core i5-12600H supports both DDR4 and DDR5 without a listed bandwidth figure. PCIe capabilities differ: the Ultra 5 offers Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-12600H offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are stronger on the newer chip, with Arc Xe-LPG 96EU versus Iris Xe 80EU. The Ultra 5 has a launch MSRP of $342; no launch MSRP is listed for the i5-12600H. The Core Ultra 5 135H was released on 2023-12-13, while the i5-12600H has no listed release date.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H has an average benchmark score of 29,093, compared to 28,882 for the Intel Core i5-12600H, a difference of 0.7%.

Q: How large is the Cinebench R23 multi-core performance gap?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600H scores 20,072, while the Core Ultra 5 135H scores 11,875.5, giving the i5-12600H a 40.8% advantage.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 135H win any benchmark by a wide margin?

A: Yes, the Core Ultra 5 135H leads by 25.4% in PassMark find prime numbers (89 vs 71) and by 17.4% in PassMark physics (1,482 vs 1,262).

Q: What is the thread count difference between the two chips?

A: The Core Ultra 5 135H has 14 cores and 18 threads, while the Core i5-12600H has 12 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core i5-12600H has a TDP of 45 watts, which is higher than the Core Ultra 5 135H’s 28 watts.

Q: Do both processors share the same L3 cache size?

A: Yes, both the Core Ultra 5 135H and the Core i5-12600H have 18 MB of shared L3 cache.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-12600H is the definitive winner in rendering and content creation workloads. Its 40.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 40% lead in R23 single-core makes it the clear pick for 3D rendering, video encoding, or any application that relies on Cinebench-style CPU performance. The 7.1% advantages in both Cinebench R20 multi-core and single-core reinforce this pattern, showing that the Alder Lake chip maintains its edge across multiple generations of the Cinebench test. For users running heavy multi-threaded production tasks where every minute of render time matters, the i5-12600H is the only logical choice from this data.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 135H wins across the board in PassMark’s diverse workload suite, making it the more versatile processor for everyday computing and specialized math tasks. The 25.4% lead in prime number finding indicates superior integer arithmetic capability, while the 17.4% lead in physics suggests better simulation and collision-detection performance. The 7% advantage in floating point math and 3.3% in integer math show consistent strength in numerical computation. The 6.1% multi-thread win and 2% single-thread win in PassMark indicate that for general multitasking, web browsing, office productivity, and light content creation, the Ultra 5 135H provides a smoother experience despite its lower TDP.

Data-heavy workloads favor the Ultra 5 as well. It leads in data compression by 1.7% and data encryption by 1.5%, along with a 4.8% advantage in random string sorting and a 3.6% edge in extended instructions. These wins, combined with the 2% single-thread PassMark advantage, make the Core Ultra 5 135H the better choice for users who prioritize responsiveness in mixed workloads, scientific calculations, or database operations. The 28-watt TDP also suggests it can deliver this performance in a more thermally constrained chassis, though the data does not include power consumption measurements.