AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS vs Intel Core i3-10325 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS and Intel Core i3-10325 represent two very different philosophies in processor design: one is a high-core-count mobile chip built on a leading-edge process, and the other is a lower-core-count desktop part with high clock speeds. Benchmark data shows the Ryzen 9 4900HS dominating the shared test suite, winning both head-to-head benchmarks with significant margins. The data indicates a 111.5% lead for AMD in multi-core rendering and a 55.6% lead in single-core rendering, making the comparison one-sided despite both processors landing at the 49th percentile among all CPUs.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core i3-10325 has 4 cores and 8 threads. This 2x difference in core count is the primary driver of the multi-core benchmark gap.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS has an average benchmark score of 2573, while the Intel Core i3-10325 scores 2530. This puts them within 1.7% of each other on average, despite the Ryzen's wins in the head-to-head tests.

Q: Which processor runs on a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is built on a 7 nm process by TSMC, while the Intel Core i3-10325 uses Intel's 14 nm process. This is a two-generation gap in process technology.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-10325 has a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz compared to the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS's 4.30 GHz. However, the Ryzen still wins the single-core head-to-head benchmark.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: Yes. The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS includes Radeon Graphics with 512SP, while the Intel Core i3-10325 includes UHD Graphics 630. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core i3-10325 has a TDP of 65 watts, while the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS has a TDP of 35 watts. This makes the AMD chip more power-efficient despite having double the cores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is substantial. The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is built on the Zen 2 architecture with the Renoir codename, manufactured on a 7 nm process by TSMC. It packs 9,800 million transistors into a 156 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Core i3-10325 uses the Comet Lake architecture with the Comet Lake-R codename, built on Intel's 14 nm process. The fact pack does not list transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

Cache configurations differ notably. Both processors share 8 MB of L3 cache, but the L2 cache differs: the AMD chip has 512 KB per core, while the Intel chip has 256 KB per core. L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core. The Ryzen 9 4900HS belongs to the 4000 series and is classified as a Ryzen 9 generation part, while the Core i3-10325 is part of the Core 10th Gen series.

Memory support shows another divergence. Both support DDR4 in a dual-channel configuration, but the AMD chip has a higher memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s compared to the Intel chip's 42.7 GB/s. PCIe support is Gen 3 for both, though the Intel part specifies 16 lanes from the CPU only. The Ryzen 9 4900HS uses AMD Socket FP6, while the Core i3-10325 uses Intel Socket 1200. The AMD chip's integrated Radeon Graphics 512SP contrasts with Intel's UHD Graphics 630.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results give a clear picture: the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS wins in both measured head-to-head tests. Its multi-core advantage is overwhelming, with a 111.5% delta over the Intel chip in Cinebench R15 multi-core. This makes the Ryzen the obvious choice for heavily threaded workloads such as video rendering, 3D modeling, and software compilation. The 8-core/16-thread configuration provides double the parallel processing capacity of the Intel part.

The Ryzen also wins in single-core performance, leading by 55.6% in Cinebench R15 single-core. This is notable because the Intel chip has higher base and boost clocks, yet the AMD architecture still delivers superior single-threaded performance in this test. The data suggests the Ryzen 9 4900HS is the better choice for both productivity and general responsiveness.

The Intel Core i3-10325 has no benchmark wins in the shared test suite. However, its profile includes additional Cinebench R20 and R23 results that the AMD part lacks in the fact pack, including a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8747 and single-core score of 1234. These additional data points do not change the head-to-head outcome, but they show the Intel chip can produce competitive numbers in its own right. The Intel part's higher clock speeds of 3.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost may appeal to users seeking raw frequency, though the benchmark data does not support a performance win.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification. Core count: 8 vs 4. Thread count: 16 vs 8. Base clock: 3.00 GHz for AMD vs 3.90 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 4.30 GHz vs 4.70 GHz. TDP: 35 watts vs 65 watts. The AMD chip uses a 7 nm process from TSMC; the Intel chip uses a 14 nm process from Intel.

Cache layout shows a 2x difference in L2 cache per core: 512 KB vs 256 KB. L3 cache is identical at 8 MB shared. Memory bandwidth favors AMD at 51.2 GB/s vs 42.7 GB/s for Intel. Both use DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode, and neither supports ECC. PCIe is Gen 3 for both, with the Intel part specifying 16 lanes from the CPU.

The socket types differ entirely: AMD Socket FP6 for the Ryzen 9 4900HS, Intel Socket 1200 for the Core i3-10325. The AMD chip is a mobile part, while the Intel chip targets desktops. Integrated graphics differ: Radeon Graphics 512SP vs UHD Graphics 630. The AMD chip has 9,800 million transistors on a 156 mm² die; the fact pack lists no transistor count or die size for the Intel chip. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel chip has a launch MSRP of $154, while the AMD chip has no listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is limited to two Cinebench R15 tests, and the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS wins both decisively. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD chip scores 1863 against the Intel's 881, a delta of 111.5%. This result aligns with the core count disparity: the Ryzen's 8 cores and 16 threads more than double the Intel's 4 cores and 8 threads in a heavily parallel workload. The score of 1863 places the AMD chip in a different performance class for rendering tasks.

The single-core test tells a more nuanced story. The AMD chip scores 193, while the Intel chip scores 124, a 55.6% delta. This is surprising given the Intel part's higher clocks: 3.90 GHz base and 4.70 GHz boost versus the AMD's 3.00 GHz and 4.30 GHz. The data indicates that the Zen 2 architecture delivers superior instructions-per-clock performance, overcoming the frequency deficit. The 7 nm process likely contributes to this efficiency.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS also shows Geekbench scores of 6926 multi-core and 1311 single-core, though the Intel chip lacks corresponding Geekbench results in the fact pack. The Intel chip's Cinebench R20 scores of 3673 multi-core and 518 single-core, along with Cinebench R23 scores of 8747 multi-core and 1234 single-core, provide additional data points for its performance profile. The average benchmark score difference is narrow: 2573 for AMD versus 2530 for Intel, a margin of just 1.7%. This suggests that while the AMD chip dominates the specific shared test, the overall benchmark landscape is closer than the head-to-head results imply. The nearest rival data reinforces this: the AMD chip sits near the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3 (2587, -0.6%), while the Intel chip sits near the Intel Xeon E-2244G (2527, +0.1%).