AMD Ryzen 3 5125C vs Intel Core i7-4940MX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two mobile processors tells a story of generation versus sheer core count. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C and the Intel Core i7-4940MX each claim one victory in the two available head-to-head tests, but the nature of those wins is very different.

The most decisive result comes in the Geekbench multi-core test. The Intel Core i7-4940MX posts a score of 3869, while the AMD Ryzen 3 5125C manages 2566. That gives Intel a 33.7% advantage, a substantial margin that reflects its physical core and thread advantage. The Intel part fields 4 cores and 8 threads against the AMD's 2 cores and 4 threads, and the data shows that raw parallelism matters heavily in this workload. A 33.7% lead is not a marginal win; it is a category-level difference in multi-threaded throughput.

The single-core story is nearly the opposite, though far less dramatic. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C scores 1237 in Geekbench single-core, edging out the Intel Core i7-4940MX's 1227. That is a 0.8% difference, which is within the noise of any real-world workload. Still, the direction of the result is significant: the older Intel part, with a 4.00 GHz boost clock, cannot match the modern AMD core on a per-thread basis. The AMD wins this test by a hair, but the architectural efficiency of the newer Zen 3 design shows through.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the two processors are remarkably close overall. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C averages 1902 across all benchmark results, while the Intel Core i7-4940MX averages 1886. That is a difference of less than 1%, which aligns with both parts sitting at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs. The Intel part's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon D-1531 (deltaPct 0.1) and the Intel Xeon E3-1270L v4 (deltaPct 0.2), while the AMD's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-9100F (deltaPct -0.1) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400GE (deltaPct -0.4). Both parts are firmly in the same performance tier, even though they achieve it through entirely different means.

The Geekbench multi-core result also reveals a broader pattern. The Intel Core i7-4940MX has more benchmark data points available, including Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 runs. Its Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 2418 and R23 multi-core score of 5759 show consistent multi-threaded capability. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C has no Cinebench data in the fact pack, but its Geekbench numbers alone place it in the same percentile range. The data suggests that in mixed workloads, the Intel part will pull ahead in heavily threaded tasks, while the AMD part will hold its own or slightly edge ahead in single-threaded responsiveness.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors spans nearly a decade of silicon evolution. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C uses Zen 3 architecture on the Cezanne-U codename, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core i7-4940MX uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process at Intel. The node difference is stark: 7 nm versus 22 nm means the AMD part packs transistors far more densely.

The transistor counts confirm this. The AMD processor integrates 10,700 million transistors on a die size of 180 mm². The Intel processor has 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The density difference is enormous, and it explains how AMD achieves competitive or better single-thread performance with half the cores and a fraction of the power budget.

Cache configurations also differ. Both parts share 8 MB of L3 cache, but the L2 cache is different: AMD provides 512 KB per core, while Intel provides 256 KB per core. The L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core. The AMD part's larger L2 allocation suggests better per-core data locality, which can contribute to its slight single-core win.

Memory support is another generational divide. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C supports DDR4 memory on a dual-channel bus with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i7-4940MX supports DDR3 on a dual-channel bus with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. That is exactly double the memory bandwidth for the AMD part, which can benefit memory-sensitive workloads even if the core count is lower.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD part provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part has more direct CPU-attached lanes, but the AMD part's 8 lanes are sufficient for most mobile configurations. Integrated graphics differ as well: AMD uses Radeon Vega 3, while Intel uses HD 4600. Both are capable of basic display output, but the fact pack does not include graphics benchmark data to compare them directly.

The power envelope is a major differentiator. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core i7-4940MX has a TDP of 57 watts. That is nearly a 4x difference in thermal design power. The Intel part compensates with a 4.00 GHz boost clock versus no listed boost for AMD (base clock 3.00 GHz versus Intel's 3.10 GHz base). The Intel part also has an unlocked multiplier, while the AMD part does not.

Production status tells the full story: the AMD part is Active, while the Intel part is End-of-life. The Intel Core i7-4940MX launched in January 2014 with a launch MSRP of $1096. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C launched in May 2022 with no listed MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i7-4940MX wins decisively. In Geekbench multi-core, it scores 3869 versus the AMD Ryzen 3 5125C's 2566, a 33.7% advantage. The Intel part's 4 cores and 8 threads outmatch the AMD's 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Is the AMD Ryzen 3 5125C faster in single-core tests?

A: Yes, but by a very slim margin. The AMD part scores 1237 in Geekbench single-core versus 1227 for the Intel Core i7-4940MX, a 0.8% difference. For practical purposes, single-threaded performance is nearly identical.

Q: How do these processors compare in overall average benchmark scores?

A: They are essentially tied. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C averages 1902, while the Intel Core i7-4940MX averages 1886. Both sit at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs, and their nearest rivals have deltaPct values under 0.5%.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core i7-4940MX has a TDP of 57 watts. The AMD part is far more power-efficient, which is relevant for mobile battery life and cooling.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C supports DDR4 with 51.2 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i7-4940MX supports DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part offers double the memory bandwidth.

Q: Is the Intel Core i7-4940MX still in production?

A: No. The Intel part is marked as End-of-life. The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C is Active. The Intel part launched in January 2014 with a launch MSRP of $1096, while the AMD part launched in May 2022.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 5125C | Intel Core i7-4940MX |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 57 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP6 | Intel Socket G3 |

| Architecture | Zen 3 | Haswell |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 10,700 million | 1,400 million |

| Die Size | 180 mm² | 177 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 3 | Intel HD 4600 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2022-05-04 | 2014-01-19 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $1096 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-4940MX wins in multi-threaded workloads. Its 33.7% lead in Geekbench multi-core is the defining result of this comparison. Any task that scales with cores and threads — content rendering, video encoding, software compilation, or running multiple virtual machines — will favor the Intel part. The 4-core, 8-thread configuration provides a clear structural advantage that no amount of architectural efficiency can overcome in the AMD part's 2-core, 4-thread design. The fact pack also includes Cinebench results for Intel (R15 multi-core 580, R20 multi-core 2418, R23 multi-core 5759), which corroborate its multi-threaded strength, though no direct AMD comparison is available for those tests.

The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C wins in efficiency and single-thread performance. Its 0.8% Geekbench single-core advantage, while tiny, shows that a modern Zen 3 core with a 7 nm process can match or slightly beat a 4.00 GHz Haswell core. The 15 watt TDP versus 57 watts means the AMD part can sustain performance in thin-and-light notebooks with passive cooling or minimal fans, where the Intel part would require substantial thermal management. The AMD part also doubles the memory bandwidth (51.2 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s), which helps in memory-bound single-threaded tasks and integrated graphics workloads.

The AMD part also wins on platform longevity. It is Active production, while the Intel part is End-of-life. For new system designs, the AMD socket FP6 platform is current, while the Intel Socket G3 is legacy. The DDR4 memory support aligns with modern memory availability, whereas DDR3 is a discontinued standard.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear trade-off between raw multi-threaded power and modern efficiency. The Intel Core i7-4940MX is the stronger choice for users who prioritize multi-core performance above all else. Its Geekbench multi-core score of 3869 is 33.7% higher than the AMD part, and its 4 cores and 8 threads provide a structural advantage that cannot be offset by newer architecture. This is a processor for heavy parallel workloads, and it remains competitive in that role despite being End-of-life. The unlocked multiplier and 4.00 GHz boost clock add overclocking headroom, though the 57 watt TDP means that headroom comes with thermal consequences.

The AMD Ryzen 3 5125C is the better choice for most modern mobile use cases. Its 15 watt TDP enables longer battery life and quieter cooling solutions. Its single-core performance is marginally better (1237 versus 1227), meaning everyday tasks like web browsing, office applications, and light productivity will feel equally responsive. The 51.2 GB/s memory bandwidth and DDR4 support make it a better fit for current system designs. The Active production status means it is available for new purchases, whereas the Intel part is a legacy product.

For a buyer choosing between these two today, the decision rests on workload. If the primary use case involves sustained multi-threaded computation and the system can handle 57 watts of heat, the Intel Core i7-4940MX delivers measurably more performance. If the priority is a balanced mobile experience with modern platform support and efficiency, the AMD Ryzen 3 5125C is the data-supported choice. The 43rd percentile ranking for both parts shows they are equivalent in the broader CPU landscape, but they achieve that equivalence through opposite strategies: brute force versus architectural refinement.