AMD Ryzen 7 7840H vs Intel Core i9-11980HK Comparison

The recorded data paints an unusually lopsided picture for a same-core-count matchup. Both the Intel Core i9-11980HK and the AMD Ryzen 7 7840H are 8-core, 16-thread mobile processors, but the Ryzen chip wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, often by margins around 20 percent or more. The i9-11980HK's single victory is a narrow specialty test. Everything else, from Cinebench to PassMark integer math, favors AMD.

The Verdict

For nearly every buyer, the data points to the Ryzen 7 7840H. It is faster in single-core work (Cinebench R23 single-core: 3350 vs 2628), faster in multi-core work (Cinebench R23 multi-core: 23731 vs 18617), and faster in memory-bound tasks thanks to DDR5 support with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth against the Intel chip's DDR4 at 51.2 GB/s. It also does all of this at a lower TDP, 35 W versus 45 W, which matters in a laptop chassis.

The i9-11980HK has two remaining arguments. First, it has an unlocked multiplier, so overclockers on compatible platforms can push clocks beyond stock. Second, it holds its value on the secondary market as an end-of-life part, and its launch MSRP of $583 is a documented figure. But nobody should choose it on performance grounds: the Ryzen 7 7840H beats it by roughly 21 percent in every Cinebench generation and by 31.5 percent in encryption. Both CPUs sit at the 81st percentile versus all CPUs in the database, so the Ryzen delivers that same class of performance more efficiently.

Architecture Differences

These chips come from different eras of silicon. The i9-11980HK is Intel's Tiger Lake-H, built on Intel's own 10 nm process, with a 190 mm² die. The Ryzen 7 7840H is the Phoenix codename on AMD's Zen 4 architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm node, packing 25,000 million transistors into a slightly smaller 178 mm² die. The node gap of two full process generations shows up directly in the power and clock numbers.

Cache design differs notably. Intel gives each core 1.25 MB of L2 and shares 24 MB of L3 across the chip, with 80 KB of L1 per core. AMD's approach is leaner per core: 64 KB of L1, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Intel's larger caches do not translate into wins anywhere except the prime-finding test, which is exactly the kind of workload that thrives on big caches.

Memory and platform support diverge sharply. The Intel part runs DDR4 on a dual-channel bus at 51.2 GB/s and lacks ECC support. The AMD part runs DDR5, dual-channel, at 89.6 GB/s, and supports ECC memory, a meaningful difference for workstation laptops. Both offer PCIe Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ too: UHD Graphics 750 on the Intel versus Radeon 780M on the AMD. Both are mobile BGA parts, so neither is upgradeable: Intel BGA 1787 for the i9, Socket FP8 for the Ryzen.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD sweep is remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core the Ryzen scores 2392 against 1876, a 21.6 percent win, and R15 single-core goes the same way at 337 vs 264, 21.7 percent. Cinebench R20 repeats it: 9967 vs 7819 multi-core and 1407 vs 1103 single-core, both 21.6 percent. Cinebench R23 lands at 23731 vs 18617 multi-core (21.5 percent) and 3350 vs 2628 single-core (21.6 percent). That uniformity across every Cinebench generation says the gap is architectural, not a fluke of one test.

PassMark tells the same story with two standouts. Data encryption is the biggest blowout: 20162 vs 13813, a 31.5 percent advantage for AMD. Extended instructions are nearly as bad for Intel at 25654 vs 17654, 31.2 percent down, which reflects the modern instruction support of Zen 4. Data compression goes to AMD by 21.9 percent (341520 vs 266571), floating point math by 21.2 percent (58724 vs 46262), integer math by 18.6 percent (96692 vs 78682), and string sorting by the same 18.6 percent (38938 vs 31709). PassMark multithread favors AMD 27919 vs 22436, 19.6 percent, and physics by 14.5 percent (1301 vs 1112).

The single-thread gap is smaller but still clear: 3641 vs 3261, 10.4 percent for the Ryzen. The one Intel win is passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the i9-11980HK scores 100 against 83, a 20.5 percent lead that lines up with its larger 24 MB L3 cache.

Specification Differences

• Base clock: 2.60 GHz (Intel) vs 3.80 GHz (AMD), a substantial idle-throughput difference.
• Boost clock: 5.00 GHz (Intel) vs 5.10 GHz (AMD).
• TDP: 45 W (Intel) vs 35 W (AMD).
• Process node: 10 nm at Intel vs 4 nm at TSMC.
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core vs 64 KB per core.
• L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core vs 1 MB per core.
• L3 cache: 24 MB shared vs 16 MB shared.
• Memory: DDR4 at 51.2 GB/s vs DDR5 at 89.6 GB/s, both dual-channel.
• ECC: not supported vs supported.
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 750 vs Radeon 780M.
• Multiplier: unlocked (Intel) vs locked (AMD).
• Production status: end-of-life vs active.
• Release date: the i9 launched 2021-05-10; the Ryzen's release date is not recorded in the database.
• Transistor count and foundry: 25,000 million transistors on TSMC silicon for AMD; the Intel transistor count is not recorded, and it is Intel-fabricated.
• Everything else matches: 8 cores, 16 threads, PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, mobile segment, and both average benchmark scores sit close (30422 vs 29868) because the averages include tests where the two never directly overlap.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster overall?

A: The Ryzen 7 7840H. It wins 16 of 17 shared benchmarks, including every Cinebench test by roughly 21 percent, and it posts the higher scores in every PassMark category except prime number finding.

Q: Does the i9-11980HK win anywhere?

A: Yes, one test: passmark_find_prime_numbers, scoring 100 vs 83, a 20.5 percent win. This is the only recorded victory for Intel, and it is likely tied to its larger 24 MB L3 cache.

Q: How do they compare in single-core performance?

A: AMD leads by about 10 percent in PassMark single-thread (3641 vs 3261) and about 21 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core (3350 vs 2628).

Q: Which is more power efficient?

A: On paper, the Ryzen. It has a 35 W TDP against the Intel's 45 W while delivering roughly 20 percent higher performance across the board.

Q: Can either CPU be overclocked?

A: Only the i9-11980HK, which has an unlocked multiplier. The Ryzen 7 7840H is locked.

Q: How do they rank against all CPUs?

A: Both sit in the 81st percentile of the database. Their average benchmark scores, 30422 and 29868, are within a fraction of a percent of rivals like the Core i5-13600H (30548) for Intel and the Ryzen 7 8845HS (29955) for AMD.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 7840H is the pick for rendering, encoding, compilation, physics simulation, compression, and any sustained multi-threaded workload: Cinebench R23 multi-core of 23731 is 21.5 percent ahead, and encryption-heavy workloads favor it by 31.5 percent. Its DDR5 bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and ECC support also make it the right choice for memory-sensitive and data-integrity-critical builds. Anyone shopping for a new laptop today should be looking at this chip, which is still an active product.

The i9-11980HK makes sense in exactly one recorded scenario: integer prime-search workloads of the type measured by passmark_find_prime_numbers, where it leads by 20.5 percent. Beyond that, its case rests on the unlocked multiplier for tuning on a BGA 1787 platform and availability of end-of-life systems. As a pure performance comparison, the data shows a one-sided result, and it favors the Ryzen in every category that matters to most users.