AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX vs AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided comparison. The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX wins all 15 recorded head-to-head tests, with no wins recorded for the AMD Ryzen AI 5 435. The Ryzen 9 8940HX sits at the 95th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Ryzen AI 5 435 sits at the 80th percentile. The average benchmark score for the 8940HX is 81103, compared to 28128 for the AI 5 435, a gap that places the two processors in entirely different performance classes. The 8940HX belongs to the 8000 series with 16 cores and 32 threads, a 55 TDP, and Zen 4 architecture on a 5 nm node. The AI 5 435 is a 6-core, 12-thread part with a 28 TDP, Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm node, and a much smaller cache footprint. Users who need maximum multi-threaded throughput should choose the 8940HX without hesitation. Users who prioritize efficiency and a more compact platform may prefer the AI 5 435, but they must accept a significant reduction in compute capability across every recorded workload.

Architecture Differences

The Ryzen 9 8940HX uses the Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC with 13,140 million transistors and a die size of 2x 71 mm². It features 16 cores and 32 threads with a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. The 8940HX supports DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 83.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth. It uses PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU and includes Radeon 610M integrated graphics. The processor is unlocked, meaning the multiplier can be adjusted for overclocking, and it is built for the AMD Socket FL1.

The Ryzen AI 5 435 uses the Zen 5 architecture under the Gorgon Point codename, manufactured on a 4 nm process by TSMC. It has 6 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The cache layout differs notably: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, but only 4 MB of L3 cache, a fraction of the 64 MB found on the 8940HX. The AI 5 435 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory in a dual-channel configuration with 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth, slightly higher than the 8940HX. It uses PCIe Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU and includes Radeon 840M integrated graphics. The processor is locked, with no unlocked multiplier, and it uses the AMD Socket FP8. The AI 5 435 also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the 8940HX.

The process node difference favors the AI 5 435 at 4 nm versus 5 nm, and the Zen 5 architecture is newer than Zen 4. However, the core count difference is decisive. The 8940HX has 16 cores versus 6 cores, and 32 threads versus 12 threads. The L3 cache difference of 64 MB versus 4 MB is massive and directly affects workloads that rely on large data sets fitting in cache. The 8940HX also has a higher boost clock at 5.30 GHz versus 4.50 GHz. The AI 5 435 does have a higher memory bandwidth rating at 89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s, and it supports LPDDR5X memory types, which the 8940HX does not. The AI 5 435 also has ECC memory support, making it potentially more attractive for certain reliability-sensitive applications.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 9 8940HX wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. The largest margins appear in multi-threaded compute tasks. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 8940HX scores 5355 against 1686, a 217.6% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the score is 32521 versus 11333, a 187% advantage. PassMark integer math shows a 210.1% lead, and floating point math shows a 180.4% lead. The encryption workload shows a 253.9% advantage, and finding prime numbers shows a 332.8% advantage, the largest single delta in the dataset. The 8940HX also dominates in memory-intensive tasks like data compression with a 188.8% lead and random string sorting with a 202.8% lead.

Single-threaded performance is closer. The 8940HX leads in Cinebench R15 single-core by 12.3% (292 versus 260) and in Cinebench R23 single-core by 5.6% (1917 versus 1816). In PassMark single-thread tests, the 8940HX leads by only 3.7% (3874 versus 3734). This indicates that for lightly threaded workloads, the Zen 5 architecture in the AI 5 435 partially compensates for its lower core count and clock speed. The physics workload shows a 95.7% lead for the 8940HX (2104 versus 1075), and the multithread PassMark test shows a 161.7% lead (49731 versus 19000).

The AI 5 435 does not win any recorded benchmark. Its advantages are architectural rather than performance-based: lower TDP at 28 watts versus 55 watts, a smaller 4 nm process node, ECC memory support, LPDDR5X memory support, and a newer Zen 5 architecture. The higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s is another point in its favor, though it does not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data. The AI 5 435 also features the Radeon 840M integrated graphics, which is a newer GPU generation than the Radeon 610M in the 8940HX, but no graphics benchmarks are recorded in this dataset.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX has 16 cores and 32 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 435 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 9 8940HX has an average benchmark score of 81103, while the Ryzen AI 5 435 has an average benchmark score of 28128. The 8940HX ranks at the 95th percentile among all CPUs, and the AI 5 435 ranks at the 80th percentile.

Q: How large is the L3 cache difference?

A: The Ryzen 9 8940HX has 64 MB of L3 cache. The Ryzen AI 5 435 has 4 MB of L3 cache. This is a 16-fold difference in L3 capacity.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 9 8940HX boosts to 5.30 GHz. The Ryzen AI 5 435 boosts to 4.50 GHz.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: The Ryzen AI 5 435 supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 9 8940HX does not.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Ryzen 9 8940HX supports DDR5 memory. The Ryzen AI 5 435 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test shows the 8940HX scoring 5355 against 1686 for the AI 5 435, a 217.6% advantage. This is the second-largest delta in the dataset and reflects the 16-core versus 6-core difference directly. The Cinebench R23 multicore test confirms the pattern with scores of 32521 versus 11333, a 187% lead. In single-core tests, the gap narrows considerably. Cinebench R15 single-core shows 292 versus 260, a 12.3% lead, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1917 versus 1816, a 5.6% lead. The PassMark single-thread test shows 3874 versus 3734, a 3.7% lead, indicating that the Zen 5 architecture of the AI 5 435 closes most of the single-thread gap despite the lower clock speed.

PassMark integer math delivers a decisive 210.1% win for the 8940HX with scores of 189221 versus 61026. Floating point math shows a 180.4% lead with scores of 113921 versus 40627. Extended instructions show a 195.1% lead with scores of 47802 versus 16197. The encryption workload is one of the largest gaps at 253.9%, with scores of 39318 versus 11110. Prime number finding shows the largest delta of all at 332.8%, with scores of 251 versus 58. Data compression shows a 188.8% lead with scores of 650984 versus 225374, and random string sorting shows a 202.8% lead with scores of 75381 versus 24891.

The multithread PassMark score of 49731 versus 19000 gives the 8940HX a 161.7% lead. The physics workload shows a 95.7% advantage with scores of 2104 versus 1075, which is the smallest multi-threaded gap in the dataset. Across all 15 recorded head-to-head tests, the 8940HX wins every single one. The smallest margins are in single-threaded workloads, where the AI 5 435's newer Zen 5 architecture demonstrates competitive per-core performance. The largest margins are in multi-threaded and cache-sensitive workloads, where the 8940HX's 16 cores, 32 threads, and 64 MB of L3 cache create an insurmountable advantage. The AI 5 435's 4 MB of L3 cache is a severe limitation for workloads that benefit from large cache residency, as evidenced by the compression and sorting test results. The data indicates that the 8940HX is the superior choice for any compute-heavy application, while the AI 5 435 offers a more efficient platform with newer architecture and memory flexibility but at a substantial performance cost.