AMD Ryzen 9 7940H vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H dominates this comparison, winning 14 of 17 head-to-head benchmark matchups. Its most decisive victories come in multi-threaded and physics workloads, where it leads by double-digit percentages across every Cinebench generation. The Intel chip scores 28,477 in Cinebench R23 multi-core against 24,703 for the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H, a 15.3% advantage that repeats almost exactly across R15 (2,870 vs 2,490) and R20 (11,960 vs 10,375). Single-core Cinebench results follow the same pattern: the Intel part leads by 15.3% to 15.4% in every version tested, including R23 single-core at 4,020 versus 3,487.

The most striking gap appears in PassMark physics testing. Intel scores 2,880 against AMD's 1,300, a 121.5% advantage that suggests the Panther Lake architecture handles simulation workloads with far greater efficiency. Prime number finding shows an even larger relative difference: Intel's score of 326 crushes AMD's 81, a 302.5% delta that points to a fundamental advantage in integer-heavy algorithmic tasks. Floating-point math also favors Intel decisively, with 103,615 versus 62,057, a 67% lead.

Data encryption is another Intel stronghold, at 25,845 versus 21,096, a 22.5% margin. Extended instructions are nearly identical, with Intel ahead by just 0.4% (26,901 vs 26,804). PassMark multi-threaded performance shows a 15% Intel lead at 33,429 versus 29,063, and single-thread performance is closer but still Intel-favored at 4,043 versus 3,952, a 2.3% edge.

AMD wins three matchups, all in memory or integer-heavy PassMark tasks. Data compression favors AMD at 352,077 versus 327,455, a 7% lead. Integer math shows a larger AMD advantage: 101,977 versus 83,695, a 17.9% margin. Random string sorting also goes to AMD by 5.4%, with scores of 42,093 versus 39,814.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice for multi-threaded productivity, simulation, and scientific computing. Every Cinebench multi-core test shows a 15.3% advantage, which translates directly to faster rendering, video encoding, and 3D workload completion times. The physics benchmark lead of 121.5% indicates exceptional performance in rigid body dynamics, fluid simulation, and similar physics-based computations. Prime number finding, with its 302.5% lead, suggests the Intel architecture handles iterative integer algorithms with unusual efficiency, which matters for cryptography, hashing, and certain financial modeling tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H wins where memory bandwidth and integer throughput dominate. Data compression at 7% faster, integer math at 17.9% faster, and random string sorting at 5.4% faster all point to workloads that stress memory access patterns and integer arithmetic rather than floating-point or SIMD operations. File compression tools, database operations, and certain types of data processing would favor the AMD chip. The Ryzen also carries ECC memory support, which the Intel part lacks, making it more appropriate for data integrity-sensitive environments.

For general desktop responsiveness, the Intel chip's 2.3% single-thread lead is modest but consistent. The 4,043 versus 3,952 PassMark single-thread scores indicate slightly faster application launch times and snappier interaction in lightly threaded software.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry, using the Panther Lake architecture. It packs 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning no simultaneous multi-threading. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H uses TSMC's 4 nm process with Zen 4 architecture in the Phoenix design, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads with SMT enabled. Despite having half the physical cores, AMD achieves the same thread count through simultaneous multi-threading.

Cache configurations differ substantially. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. AMD offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The Intel part has more cache at every level, which contributes to its strong performance in cache-sensitive workloads like physics simulation and prime number finding.

Clock speeds favor AMD on paper: 4.00 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost versus Intel's 2.00 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. However, the benchmark results show Intel winning most tests despite the lower clock rates, indicating better instructions-per-clock efficiency. Thermal design power differs too, with Intel rated at 25 W and AMD at 35 W, meaning Intel delivers higher performance at a lower power envelope in these measurements.

Memory support and bandwidth also diverge. Intel supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. AMD supports DDR5 only, also dual-channel, at 89.6 GB/s. Intel's higher memory bandwidth helps in bandwidth-constrained workloads, though AMD still wins in data compression and integer math. PCIe connectivity favors AMD with Gen 4 at 20 lanes versus Intel's Gen 5 at 12 lanes, giving AMD more total lanes for expansion devices.

The integrated graphics differ as well: Intel uses Xe3 Graphics, while AMD pairs with Radeon 780M. AMD's silicon is larger at 178 mm² with 25,000 million transistors, while Intel's die size is not recorded. Both use BGA sockets, Intel BGA 2540 versus AMD Socket FP8, and both are locked (no unlocked multiplier).

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H as the superior processor for most workloads. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, including all Cinebench multi-core and single-core benchmarks, physics, floating-point math, encryption, and prime number finding. The 15.3% consistent lead across three Cinebench generations indicates a broad architectural advantage in rendering and compute tasks. The 121.5% physics lead and 302.5% prime number lead are exceptional margins that suggest the Intel Panther Lake architecture is particularly well-suited to simulation and algorithmic workloads.

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940H wins in three specific areas: data compression (7% faster), integer math (17.9% faster), and random string sorting (5.4% faster). These are meaningful for users whose primary workloads involve compression, database operations, or integer-heavy data processing. The 17.9% integer math lead is the largest AMD advantage and indicates that certain calculation-heavy tasks would run noticeably faster on the Ryzen.

For users who prioritize rendering, scientific computing, physics simulation, or encryption, the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice. Its 3 nm process, larger cache hierarchy, and higher memory bandwidth deliver measurable wins in floating-point and multi-threaded workloads. The lower 25 W TDP also suggests it can achieve these results while consuming less power than AMD's 35 W design.

Users whose workloads center on data compression, integer math, or string manipulation should consider the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H. Its 17.9% integer math advantage is substantial, and the ECC memory support adds reliability features that Intel does not offer. The Ryzen also provides more PCIe lanes (20 vs 12), which benefits users with many expansion devices.

Both processors sit at the 87th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating they are both high-performance mobile parts. The Intel chip's average benchmark score is 41,263 versus 40,431 for AMD, a difference of about 2%. The Intel chip's nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H at 41,215 (0.1% behind), while the AMD chip's closest competitor is the Intel Xeon 6507P at 40,426 (0% difference).

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H wins all three Cinebench multi-core tests by 15.3%. Scores are 2,870 vs 2,490 in R15, 11,960 vs 10,375 in R20, and 28,477 vs 24,703 in R23.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, AMD wins three tests: data compression (352,077 vs 327,455, 7% faster), integer math (101,977 vs 83,695, 17.9% faster), and random string sorting (42,093 vs 39,814, 5.4% faster).

Q: Which chip has better single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 366H leads in single-thread tests. PassMark single-thread scores are 4,043 vs 3,952, a 2.3% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core is 4,020 vs 3,487, a 15.3% lead.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark find prime numbers, where Intel scores 326 vs AMD's 81, a 302.5% advantage. The second largest is physics at 121.5% (2,880 vs 1,300).

Q: How do memory bandwidth specifications compare?

A: Intel supports dual-channel DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. AMD supports dual-channel DDR5 only with 89.6 GB/s. Intel's bandwidth is about 28.6% higher.

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: Intel has 16 physical cores and 16 threads. AMD has 8 physical cores and 16 threads, using simultaneous multi-threading to match the thread count.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 7 366H | AMD Ryzen 9 7940H |

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

| Cores | 16 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 2.00 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 25 W | 35 W |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 25,000 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 178 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB per core | 64 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 18 MB shared | 16 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 12 lanes | Gen 4, 20 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics | Radeon 780M |

| Socket | Intel BGA 2540 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Panther Lake | Zen 4 (Phoenix) |

| Average Benchmark Score | 41,263 | 40,431 |