AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS vs Intel Core i9-11950H Comparison

The benchmark data positions the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS as the decisive winner over the Intel Core i9-11950H, taking 14 of 17 head-to-head tests. The AMD chip leads by a substantial margin in single-threaded workloads and encryption, while the Intel part holds a narrow edge in a few math-heavy tasks. Both processors sit at the 80th percentile against all CPUs, but the Ryzen 5 PRO achieves a higher average benchmark score of 28478 versus 28332 for the Core i9. This comparison is not a close call; the newer Zen 4 architecture delivers a generational uplift that the older Tiger Lake-H design cannot match across most workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS wins every Cinebench iteration, both single-core and multi-core, with consistent margins around 4.8%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the AMD scores 18104 against Intel's 17279, a 4.8% advantage. The single-core R23 result is similarly decisive: 2555 versus 2439, again a 4.8% lead. These results repeat across R15 and R20, with the AMD part scoring 1824 versus 1741 in R15 multi-core and 7603 versus 7257 in R20 multi-core. The pattern is clear: regardless of the Cinebench version, the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS outperforms the Core i9-11950H by a nearly identical percentage, indicating a consistent architectural efficiency advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The largest single win for AMD comes in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 14962 against Intel's 12658, an 18.2% margin. This is followed by a 13.4% lead in PassMark single-thread (3561 versus 3141) and a 13.1% lead in extended instructions (18507 versus 16361). These results highlight that the Zen 4 core is substantially faster per thread and significantly better at cryptographic and SIMD-style operations. In PassMark multithread, the AMD chip also wins, scoring 21465 versus 20900, a 2.7% margin, despite having 6 cores and 12 threads compared to Intel's 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD part also edges out Intel in data compression (246446 versus 246195, 0.1%), physics (1043 versus 1013, 3%), and random string sorting (30235 versus 29375, 2.9%).

The Intel Core i9-11950H wins only three tests, and all are in PassMark math workloads. The largest Intel victory is in find prime numbers, where it scores 93 against AMD's 71, a 23.7% margin. Intel also wins integer math (74649 versus 69839, 6.4%) and floating-point math (44137 versus 43019, 2.5%). These wins suggest that the Intel part has a raw computational throughput advantage in certain integer and prime-number workloads, likely due to its higher core count of 8 versus 6. However, these three wins are narrow in the context of the overall benchmark suite, and the AMD chip's 14 wins overshadow them. The data shows that while Intel retains a niche in pure math processing, the AMD processor is faster in nearly every other measurable category, including all rendering tests and most system-level PassMark subtests.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental difference lies in the manufacturing process and core design. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Core i9-11950H uses a 10 nm process from Intel. This process gap explains much of the performance difference; the smaller node allows AMD to achieve higher clock speeds at lower power consumption. The AMD chip has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, whereas the Intel part has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. Despite Intel's higher boost clock, the AMD chip wins all single-thread benchmarks, indicating that the Zen 4 architecture executes instructions more efficiently per clock cycle.

Core and cache configurations also differ significantly. The AMD part has 6 cores and 12 threads with a 16 MB shared L3 cache and 1 MB L2 per core. The Intel part has 8 cores and 16 threads with a larger 24 MB shared L3 cache and 1.25 MB L2 per core. Intel's larger cache and higher core count do not translate into overall wins, as the AMD chip's superior per-core performance compensates for its lower core count. The L1 cache also differs: AMD has 64 KB per core, while Intel has 80 KB per core. The transistor count and die size further illustrate the architectural divergence; AMD packs 25,000 million transistors into a 178 mm² die, while Intel's die is slightly larger at 190 mm² with no transistor count provided.

Memory support is another major differentiator. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel Core i9-11950H supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. This 75% bandwidth advantage for AMD likely contributes to its wins in data compression and encryption, which are memory-sensitive. The AMD chip also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Intel part. Both processors use dual-channel memory buses and PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes. The integrated graphics also differ: AMD uses Radeon 760M, while Intel uses UHD Graphics 750. Finally, the AMD part is currently active in production, while the Intel part is end-of-life, reflecting their respective release dates of 2024-04-15 and 2021-05-10.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS for most users. With 14 wins out of 17 benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests and the critical single-thread and encryption workloads, the AMD chip is the better performer in rendering, general productivity, and security-related tasks. Its 4.8% lead across all Cinebench versions indicates a consistent advantage in multi-threaded content creation, despite having two fewer cores. The 18.2% lead in data encryption makes it the clear choice for any workload involving cryptography, such as VPNs, secure file transfers, or database encryption.

The Intel Core i9-11950H is only preferable in a narrow set of math-intensive workloads. Its 23.7% lead in find prime numbers and 6.4% lead in integer math suggest it may be better suited for specific scientific or financial computations that rely heavily on these operations. However, these wins are offset by the AMD chip's superior performance in floating-point math, which is more common in engineering and simulation software. Given that the Intel part is end-of-life and the AMD part is active, the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the forward-looking choice. Its newer architecture, support for DDR5 and ECC memory, and higher average benchmark score of 28478 versus 28332 make it the recommended processor for any new system build.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS | Intel Core i9-11950H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.90 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 35 W |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 24 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 760M | UHD Graphics 750 |

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

| Release Date | 2024-04-15 | 2021-05-10 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | $556 |

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS wins all single-core benchmarks, including a 13.4% lead in PassMark single-thread (3561 versus 3141) and a 4.8% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core (2555 versus 2439), despite Intel having a higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz versus 4.90 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core i9-11950H win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the Intel part wins three tests: PassMark find prime numbers (93 versus 71, a 23.7% margin), integer math (74649 versus 69839, 6.4%), and floating-point math (44137 versus 43019, 2.5%).

Q: How does the core count affect performance?

A: Intel has 8 cores and 16 threads versus AMD's 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite this, AMD wins Cinebench R23 multi-core (18104 versus 17279), indicating its per-core efficiency more than compensates for the two-core deficit.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The AMD chip supports DDR5 and has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Intel chip supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, giving AMD a 75% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS supports ECC memory; the Intel Core i9-11950H does not.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is listed as Active, while the Intel Core i9-11950H is marked as End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the winner for content creation and rendering. Its consistent 4.8% lead across all Cinebench versions, from R15 to R23, makes it the superior choice for video editing, 3D modeling, and animation. The AMD chip also dominates in data encryption (18.2% lead) and extended instructions (13.1% lead), making it ideal for security software, database encryption, and any workload that leverages modern SIMD instructions. For general productivity, the AMD chip's 13.4% lead in single-thread performance ensures snappier application launches and faster spreadsheet calculations. Its 2.7% lead in multithread performance, despite fewer cores, solidifies its position for multitasking and parallel workloads. The AMD chip also wins in data compression (0.1%), physics (3%), and random string sorting (2.9%), covering a broad range of system tasks.

The Intel Core i9-11950H wins specifically in prime-number calculations and integer math, with a 23.7% and 6.4% lead respectively. This makes it the pick for specialized scientific computing, cryptography research, or financial modeling that relies heavily on integer arithmetic. Its 2.5% lead in floating-point math also gives it an edge in certain simulation and physics engines. However, these wins are isolated to math-heavy benchmarks, and the Intel chip does not win any rendering or general-purpose tests. For users whose workloads are exclusively integer or prime-number based, the Intel part is viable, but for all other tasks, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640HS is the better choice. The data shows a clear split: AMD for broad performance, Intel for niche math operations.