AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two mobile processors along clear lines. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX wins 8 of the 13 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H takes 5. The AMD part dominates in heavily multithreaded workloads, while the Intel chip counters with advantages in single-threaded and physics-oriented tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX establishes its strongest territory in integer math, where it scores 202,883 against the Intel chip's 87,284, a 132.4% advantage. That result signals superior performance in general-purpose compute, compilation workloads, and any task that relies on rapid integer operations. The AMD chip also shows a massive lead in data compression at 693,741 versus 352,365, a 96.9% gap. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H cannot close that distance, which matters for archiving, database workloads, and file-system operations.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins in single-threaded tasks, taking passmark_single_thread with 4,218 against 3,942, a 6.5% edge. It also leads in Cinebench R23 single-core at 2,071.5 versus 1,807, a 12.8% margin. The Intel chip shows particular strength in prime-number finding at 341 versus 273, a 19.9% lead, and in physics simulation at 3,028 versus 2,297, a 24.1% advantage. Those wins point to workloads with light thread counts but high per-core demands, such as interactive simulations, legacy game engines, and certain scientific calculations.

The AMD chip takes the remaining wins: floating-point math at 121,383 versus 108,527 (11.8% lead), extended instructions at 51,029 versus 29,138 (75.1% lead), data encryption at 41,974 versus 27,150 (54.6% lead), multithread at 53,204 versus 35,399 (50.3% lead), and random string sorting at 81,775 versus 42,135 (94.1% lead). The Cinebench R23 multicore result shows the AMD part at 29,400 versus 20,547, a 43.1% advantage, confirming that the Ryzen 9 7940HX scales much better across all cores.

The use-case split is straightforward. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX suits content creation, 3D rendering, video encoding, and any parallel workload that can use 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H suits interactive tasks, lightweight development builds, and applications that respond primarily to single-core speed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors implement fundamentally different designs. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX uses the Zen 4 architecture with the Dragon Range codename, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H uses the Panther Lake architecture, built on Intel's 3 nm process. The AMD chip's die size is listed as 2x 71 mm² with 13,140 million transistors, while the Intel part has no die size or transistor count recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts differ critically. Both have 16 cores, but the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX supports 32 threads via simultaneous multithreading, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 threads with no SMT. That 2:1 thread ratio explains the AMD chip's large lead in multithreaded benchmarks. The AMD part also has a higher boost clock at 5.20 GHz versus 4.90 GHz, and a higher base clock at 2.40 GHz versus 2.10 GHz.

Cache hierarchies diverge substantially. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and a large 64 MB L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 192 KB L1 per core, 2.5 MB L2 per core, and only 18 MB of shared L3. The AMD chip's 64 MB L3 is more than 3.5 times larger than the Intel's 18 MB, which helps in workloads with large working sets that fit in cache.

Memory support also differs. Both support dual-channel memory, but the AMD chip uses DDR5 with a recorded bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The Intel part supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, with a higher recorded bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Intel chip's memory bandwidth advantage may help in some memory-bound tasks, though the benchmark data does not isolate that effect.

Power envelopes are far apart. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a TDP of 25 watts. The AMD part consumes more power to deliver its multithreaded performance. The Intel chip operates at less than half the TDP, which suggests a thinner and lighter laptop design with longer battery life under sustained load.

PCIe lane counts differ as well. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX provides 28 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H provides 12 Gen 5 lanes. That gives the AMD platform more headroom for discrete GPUs, NVMe storage, and other high-bandwidth peripherals. The Intel chip includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the AMD chip uses Radeon 610M integrated graphics.

The AMD part is multiplier-unlocked, while the Intel chip is locked. The AMD processor uses AMD Socket FL1, whereas the Intel chip uses Intel BGA 2540, meaning they are not socket-compatible. Release dates in the database show the AMD part arriving on 2024-01-16 and the Intel part on 2026-01-04.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX comes in passmark_integer_math, where the 202,883 score beats the Intel's 87,284 by 132.4%. That result is more than double the Intel chip's output and represents the clearest performance gap in the comparison set. The AMD chip also scores 96.9% higher in passmark_data_compression (693,741 versus 352,365) and 94.1% higher in passmark_random_string_sorting (81,775 versus 42,135).

In Cinebench R23 multicore, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX scores 29,400 against the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H's 20,547, a 43.1% advantage. That benchmark is a common proxy for rendering and video encoding performance. The AMD chip's passmark_multithread score of 53,204 versus 35,399 shows a 50.3% lead, consistent with the 2:1 thread advantage.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins the single-core comparisons. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel chip scores 2,071.5 against 1,807, a 12.8% lead. In passmark_single_thread, it scores 4,218 against 3,942, a 6.5% lead. The Intel chip also wins passmark_physics at 3,028 versus 2,297, a 24.1% margin, and passmark_find_prime_numbers at 341 versus 273, a 19.9% margin.

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX also wins passmark_extended_instructions by 75.1% (51,029 versus 29,138), passmark_data_encryption by 54.6% (41,974 versus 27,150), and passmark_floating_point_math by 11.8% (121,383 versus 108,527). The floating-point margin is modest, suggesting that both parts handle FP workloads reasonably well, but the AMD chip still holds the edge.

The overall average benchmark scores put the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX at 69,875, which places it in the 94th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H averages 43,210, placing it in the 88th percentile. The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F at 69,996 (0.2% higher) and the Intel Core i7-14700KF at 70,163 (0.4% higher). The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43,326 (0.3% higher) and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43,431 (0.5% higher).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has 32 threads from its 16 cores, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 16 threads from its 16 cores. The AMD chip uses simultaneous multithreading; the Intel chip does not.

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H wins all single-threaded comparisons. It scores 2,071.5 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1,807 for the AMD chip, a 12.8% lead, and 4,218 in passmark_single_thread versus 3,942, a 6.5% lead.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has 64 MB of L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip's cache is more than 3.5 times larger.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has a TDP of 55 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a TDP of 25 watts. The Intel chip consumes less than half the power of the AMD part.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s with support for DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has 83.2 GB/s with DDR5 support only.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX has an average benchmark score of 69,875 and sits in the 94th percentile. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H averages 43,210 and sits in the 88th percentile.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two very different mobile processors. The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is the choice for multithreaded performance. It leads by 43.1% in Cinebench R23 multicore, by 50.3% in passmark_multithread, and by 132.4% in integer math. That performance comes with a 55 watt TDP, a large 64 MB L3 cache, and 32 threads. Anyone running rendering, video encoding, compilation, or data-heavy workloads should select the AMD part based on the benchmark results.

The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the choice for single-threaded responsiveness and power efficiency. It leads in Cinebench R23 single-core by 12.8%, in passmark_single_thread by 6.5%, in physics simulation by 24.1%, and in prime-number finding by 19.9%. Its 25 watt TDP is less than half the AMD chip's power draw, and its 115.2 GB/s memory bandwidth is higher. The Intel part also uses Intel Xe3 Graphics and supports LPDDR5X memory, which may benefit thinner laptops.

The average benchmark score strongly favors the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX at 69,875 versus 43,210, placing it in the 94th percentile versus the Intel chip's 88th. The Intel part's 16 threads without SMT limit its ceiling in parallel work. The AMD part's 32 threads and higher boost clock of 5.20 GHz give it a wider performance envelope.

For a workstation-class mobile laptop with heavy parallel workloads, the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX delivers the recorded performance. For a lighter, more efficient system where single-core speed matters most, the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H holds the advantage in the data. The choice hinges on whether the workload scales across threads or stays largely within a few cores.