AMD Athlon Silver 3050U vs Intel Core i7-940 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unusual matchup: a modern low-power mobile processor against a legacy desktop flagship. The Intel Core i7-940 wins all five recorded head-to-head benchmarks, taking a 5-0 sweep. The margin is consistent, roughly 4.5% to 4.6% across every test. The AMD Athlon Silver 3050U, despite launching over a decade later, does not overtake the older Intel part in any single measurement recorded in the database.

The intended user for each chip is entirely different. The AMD Athlon Silver 3050U is a mobile part, soldered to a motherboard, designed for lightweight laptops. Its 15-watt TDP makes it suitable for fanless or low-noise designs. The Intel Core i7-940 is a desktop processor from the Nehalem generation, requiring a dedicated motherboard and cooler, and consuming 130 watts. The data suggests that if raw compute performance is the sole criterion, the Intel wins. However, the AMD part offers a fundamental advantage in power efficiency and platform integration, which the benchmark scores do not capture.

For a user who prioritizes the absolute highest multi-threaded scores in Cinebench, the Intel Core i7-940 is the correct choice. For a user who requires a modern, low-power mobile processor with integrated graphics, the AMD Athlon Silver 3050U is the only viable option. The benchmark results are narrow: they only measure processing speed. They do not measure platform cost, power draw, or physical size.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Athlon Silver 3050U uses the Zen architecture, specifically the Dali codename, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 2 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The cache hierarchy consists of 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. It includes a Radeon Vega 3 integrated graphics unit, which the Intel lacks entirely.

The Intel Core i7-940 is based on the Nehalem architecture, codenamed Bloomfield, built on a 45 nm process. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 2.93 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. Its cache layout is different: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. It has no integrated graphics, no on-die memory controller features like the AMD's dual-channel DDR4 support, and uses a triple-channel DDR3 memory bus. The AMD has a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Intel's bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

The AMD processor is a 14 nm, 3,500 million transistor chip with a die size of 148 mm². The Intel is a 45 nm, 731 million transistor chip with a die size of 263 mm². The AMD is nearly five times denser in transistor count per area, which explains its lower power consumption. The Intel is an end-of-life product, while the AMD is still active. The AMD supports DDR4 memory, the Intel supports DDR3. The AMD has 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU; the Intel has PCIe Gen 2 without a lane count specified.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data are consistent across all five recorded tests. The Intel Core i7-940 wins every single one. The margins are tight, between 4.5% and 4.6%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel scores 264 against the AMD's 252. That is a 4.5% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Intel scores 1102 against 1052, again a 4.5% lead. The single-core tests show the same pattern: Cinebench R20 single-core, 155 for the Intel, 148 for the AMD, a 4.5% difference. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 2626 for the Intel, 2505 for the AMD, a 4.6% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core: 370 versus 353, a 4.6% lead.

The AMD's advantage does not appear anywhere in the head-to-head data. It has zero wins out of five tests. Its only recorded benchmark scores are the ones listed, and the Intel outperforms it in all of them. The margins are small but consistent. The fact that the same delta appears across multi-core and single-core tests suggests the Intel's architecture has a slight per-clock efficiency advantage, or the boost clocks matter more than the core counts.

The AMD's average benchmark score is 917, based on its seven recorded tests. The Intel's average is 903, based on its five tests. That average, however, is misleading because the AMD includes Geekbench scores which are not in the Intel's record. The head-to-head tests are the only true apples-to-apples comparison. In those, the Intel wins by a narrow but repeated margin.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-940 scores higher in every multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2626 versus the AMD's 2505, a 4.6% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD have any benchmark win?

A: No. The database records zero wins for the AMD Athlon Silver 3050U in the head-to-head comparison. The Intel wins all five recorded tests.

Q: Which CPU has more cores?

A: The Intel has 4 physical cores and 8 threads. The AMD has 2 physical cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which CPU is more energy-efficient?

A: The AMD has a 15 watt TDP, while the Intel has a 130 watt TDP. The AMD's TDP is substantially lower.

Q: Do both CPUs have integrated graphics?

A: No. The AMD includes a Radeon Vega 3 integrated GPU. The Intel has no integrated graphics unit.

Q: Which CPU is still in production?

A: The AMD Athlon Silver 3050U has an active production status. The Intel Core i7-940 is listed as end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-940 wins in every recorded processing benchmark. Its strengths lie in raw compute throughput, both in single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks. The 4.5% to 4.6% lead in Cinebench tests means it will be slightly faster in rendering, video encoding, and other CPU-bound workloads. Its higher base clock of 2.93 GHz against the AMD's 2.20 GHz gives it an edge in tasks that do not scale with boost clock. Its 8 MB of L3 cache is double the AMD's 4 MB, which can help in workloads with large working sets.

The AMD Athlon Silver 3050U wins in no recorded benchmark, but it wins in other dimensions. Its 15 watt TDP versus the Intel's 130 watt TDP makes it suitable for fanless laptops and portable devices. Its integrated Radeon Vega 3 graphics mean it can output to a display without a separate GPU. Its DDR4 memory support and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth are modern. It uses a newer process node, 14 nm versus 45 nm, which translates to less heat and longer battery life. The AMD is also an active product, while the Intel is end-of-life.

The use-case split is clear. For raw compute, the Intel is the better performer. For a modern, low-power, integrated system, the AMD is the only sensible choice. The Intel's performance advantage is small, around 4.5% to 4.6%, but it is consistent. The AMD's advantage in power consumption is massive, 15 watts versus 130 watts, and it has the added benefit of a built-in GPU.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in nearly every base specification. The AMD has 2 cores and 4 threads; the Intel has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD's base clock is 2.20 GHz; the Intel's is 2.93 GHz. Both have the same boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The AMD's TDP is 15 watts; the Intel's is 130 watts. The AMD uses the Zen architecture on a 14 nm process for GlobalFoundries, with 3,500 million transistors and a 148 mm² die. The Intel uses the Nehalem architecture on a 45 nm process, with 731 million transistors and a 263 mm² die.

The cache configurations differ. The AMD has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The Intel has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The AMD supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel supports DDR3 with a triple-channel bus and no recorded bandwidth. The AMD has a Radeon Vega 3 integrated GPU; the Intel has none. The AMD has PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only); the Intel has PCIe Gen 2. The AMD is an active mobile part; the Intel is an end-of-life desktop part. The AMD was released in January 2020, the Intel in November 2008. Both processors have locked multipliers.