AMD Ryzen 3 3200U vs Intel Core i7-940 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a genuinely split picture, with each processor claiming victories in different workload types. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U posts a score of 334, finishing 21% ahead of the Intel Core i7-940's 264. That is a decisive margin for the newer, lower-power chip in an older rendering workload. However, the story flips dramatically in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core i7-940 scores 2626 against the Ryzen 3 3200U's 1786, a 47% advantage for Intel. The database records this as the largest delta between the two parts in any shared benchmark.

Single-core performance belongs firmly to the AMD side. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen 3 3200U scores 765, which is 51.6% higher than the Intel Core i7-940's 370. That is a massive gap, reflecting the generational leap in architectural efficiency. The Intel part simply cannot match the per-thread throughput of the newer Zen design, even though the Intel chip has twice the core count and nearly three times the TDP budget.

Looking at the overall averages, the two processors are remarkably close. The Intel Core i7-940 has an average benchmark score of 903 across all recorded tests, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U sits at 893. That is a difference of roughly 1%, which puts both chips in the same performance tier despite their completely different designs. The Intel part sits in the 24th percentile of all CPUs in the database, and the Ryzen 3 3200U also sits in the 24th percentile, confirming their statistical equivalence in aggregate terms.

The nearest rivals for each part reinforce this picture. The Intel Core i7-940's closest competitor is the Intel Core i5-5350U with an identical average score of 903, a 0% delta. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-5300U at 895, just 0.2% behind. Both chips are essentially interchangeable with a cluster of low-to-mid-range processors from a few years ago, which is a notable finding given the age difference between the two parts being compared here.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U wins in every single-threaded scenario and in the older multi-threaded Cinebench R15 test. Its single-core scores are dominant, with the 51.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core being the standout result. For tasks that rely on per-thread responsiveness, such as everyday desktop navigation, light productivity work, or older software that does not scale well across cores, the Ryzen 3 3200U is the clear choice. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win, while smaller at 21%, also suggests that the AMD chip handles legacy threading patterns with better efficiency.

The Intel Core i7-940 wins decisively in the modern multi-core Cinebench R23 test, with a 47% margin. This is where its four physical cores and eight threads come into play. Modern rendering workloads that scale across multiple cores will prefer the Intel part, as the data shows it can sustain a much higher throughput when all cores are engaged. The Intel chip's larger 8 MB shared L3 cache versus the Ryzen's 4 MB shared L3 also contributes to this advantage in cache-hungry multi-threaded tasks.

For users who run contemporary multi-threaded applications, the Intel Core i7-940 is the stronger option despite being a decade older. For users who need snappy single-threaded performance or run legacy applications, the Ryzen 3 3200U is the better fit. The database shows two wins for the AMD chip and one for Intel, but the magnitude of Intel's multi-core win is substantial enough to make it the better choice for heavily threaded workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from completely different eras and design philosophies. The Intel Core i7-940 uses the Nehalem architecture, codenamed Bloomfield, built on a 45 nm process node at Intel's foundries. It packs 731 million transistors into a 263 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U uses the Zen architecture, codenamed Raven Ridge, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The transistor count difference is enormous, with AMD fitting nearly seven times as many transistors on a slightly smaller die thanks to the much newer manufacturing process.

Core configurations differ substantially. The Intel part has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD part has 2 cores and 4 threads. The Intel chip has a base clock of 2.93 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The AMD chip has a lower base clock of 2.60 GHz but a higher boost clock of 3.50 GHz. The Intel part draws 130 W TDP, while the AMD part is rated for just 15 W, a nearly nine-fold difference in power envelope. This explains why the Intel chip can sustain higher multi-core throughput despite its older architecture, while the AMD chip achieves its single-core wins through superior instruction efficiency.

Cache layouts also diverge significantly. The Intel Core i7-940 has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. The AMD part has larger per-core caches, which helps its single-thread performance, while the Intel part has double the shared L3, which aids multi-threaded workloads that share data. Memory support differs as well: the Intel chip uses DDR3 with a triple-channel memory bus, while the AMD chip uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s.

The Intel part uses PCIe Gen 2, while the AMD part uses PCIe Gen 3. The AMD chip includes integrated graphics in the form of Radeon Vega 3, while the Intel part has no integrated graphics. The Intel chip is a desktop part on Socket 1366, while the AMD chip is a mobile part on Socket FP5. The Intel chip is end-of-life, while the AMD chip remains active in production. The release dates are separated by over a decade, with Intel launching in November 2008 and AMD launching in January 2019.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-940 has an average score of 903, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U has an average score of 893. The difference is approximately 1%, placing both at the 24th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: Why does the Intel Core i7-940 win Cinebench R23 multi-core by such a large margin?

A: The Intel chip has 4 cores and 8 threads versus 2 cores and 4 threads for the AMD chip, along with a 130 W TDP versus 15 W. These factors allow the Intel part to sustain higher multi-threaded throughput, scoring 2626 versus 1786 in that test.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U in single-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the AMD chip scores 765 against the Intel chip's 370, a 51.6% advantage. This is the largest performance gap recorded in any shared benchmark between the two parts.

Q: Are these processors comparable to any other CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core i7-940's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-5350U with an identical average score of 903. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-5300U at 895, just 0.2% behind.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the Intel Core i7-940 and the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U have ECC memory support marked as false in the database.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U has integrated graphics, featuring Radeon Vega 3. The Intel Core i7-940 has no integrated graphics listed in the database.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Intel Core i7-940 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U has 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2.93 GHz for Intel and 2.60 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks are 3.20 GHz for Intel and 3.50 GHz for AMD. The TDP ratings are 130 W for Intel and 15 W for AMD.

Sockets differ completely: Intel uses Socket 1366, AMD uses Socket FP5. The architectures are Nehalem versus Zen, with codenames Bloomfield versus Raven Ridge. Process nodes are 45 nm versus 14 nm. Transistor counts are 731 million versus 4,940 million. Die sizes are 263 mm² versus 210 mm².

Cache configurations differ in every level. L1 cache is 64 KB per core for Intel versus 96 KB per core for AMD. L2 cache is 256 KB per core versus 512 KB per core. L3 cache is 8 MB shared versus 4 MB shared. Memory support is DDR3 versus DDR4, with triple-channel versus dual-channel memory buses. The AMD chip records a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Intel chip has no bandwidth figure listed.

PCIe support is Gen 2 for Intel and Gen 3 for AMD. The AMD chip includes Radeon Vega 3 integrated graphics, while Intel has none. Market segments are Desktop for Intel and Mobile for AMD. Production status is End-of-life for Intel and Active for AMD. Release dates are November 2008 for Intel and January 2019 for AMD. Neither chip has a launch MSRP listed, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload type. The AMD Ryzen 3 3200U is the better choice for single-threaded tasks, legacy applications, and power-constrained mobile use. Its 51.6% single-core advantage in Cinebench R23 makes it the superior daily driver for general responsiveness, and its 15 W TDP means it belongs in thin-and-light laptops where efficiency matters more than raw throughput.

The Intel Core i7-940 is the better choice for modern multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its 47% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core demonstrates that four physical cores and eight threads still matter when an application can use them. The 130 W TDP is a significant drawback, but for a desktop system with adequate cooling, the Intel part offers substantially better multi-core performance.

The overall average scores are nearly identical, with the Intel chip at 903 and the AMD chip at 893. Both sit at the 24th percentile of all CPUs. The database records 1 win for Intel and 2 wins for AMD in head-to-head benchmarks, but the magnitude of Intel's multi-core win outweighs the count. For users who need multi-threaded rendering, pick the Intel Core i7-940. For users who need single-threaded speed and efficiency, pick the AMD Ryzen 3 3200U. The choice comes down to whether your workload scales across cores or depends on per-core performance.