AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX vs Intel Core i9-14900KF Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmark comparisons?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KF wins 12 of 15 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX wins 3. The Intel chip dominates in raw throughput and single-thread performance, but the AMD part claims specific wins in extended instructions, prime number finding, and the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KF scores 49,370 versus the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX’s 32,521, giving Intel a 34.1% advantage. This is the largest multi-core gap between the two in any benchmark, reflecting Intel’s 24-core configuration against AMD’s 16-core design.

Q: What is the single-core performance difference?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KF leads by 72.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core (6,969 vs 1,917) and by 58.4% in Cinebench R15 single-core (702 vs 292). The Intel chip’s 6.00 GHz boost clock versus AMD’s 5.30 GHz boost clock is a key factor, though the gap is unusually large even accounting for clock speed.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX and the Intel Core i9-14900KF have an unlocked multiplier. However, the AMD part is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FL1, while the Intel part is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700, so the practical overclocking context differs significantly.

Q: Which chip has better memory flexibility?

A: The Intel Core i9-14900KF supports both DDR4 and DDR5, whereas the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX supports only DDR5. The Intel chip also supports ECC memory, which the AMD part does not. The AMD chip has a rated memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, while the Intel chip’s bandwidth is not listed in the data.

Q: How do the processors rank among all CPUs?

A: Both sit at the 95th percentile among all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX has an average benchmark score of 81,103, while the Intel Core i9-14900KF averages 79,371. The AMD chip’s nearest rival is the Intel Xeon w5-3535X at 81,115 (0% delta), while Intel’s nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 9 290HX Plus at 79,574 (-0.3% delta).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX is built on TSMC’s 5 nm process with a Zen 4 architecture under the Dragon Range codename, part of the 8000 series. It packs 16 cores and 32 threads, with a die size of 2x 71 mm² and 13,140 million transistors. The Intel Core i9-14900KF uses Intel’s 10 nm process (Raptor Lake architecture, Raptor Lake-R codename) from the Core 14th Gen family, with 24 cores and 32 threads on a 257 mm² die. The Intel chip lists no transistor count in the data. Both are active production parts with unlocked multipliers.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The AMD chip provides 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 64 MB L3 cache. The Intel chip offers 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The AMD part’s larger L3 pool (64 MB vs 36 MB) may benefit certain workloads, though the Intel chip’s higher per-core L1 and L2 allocations suggest a different caching strategy. Neither chip features 3D V-Cache.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX integrates a Radeon 610M GPU, while the Intel Core i9-14900KF has no integrated graphics. The AMD part supports PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), whereas the Intel chip provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The AMD part is a mobile processor with a 55 W TDP, while the Intel chip is a desktop part with a 125 W TDP. The AMD chip uses dual-channel DDR5 memory only, while the Intel chip supports dual-channel DDR4 and DDR5 with ECC capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i9-14900KF claims the majority of wins, but the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX takes three notable victories. The AMD part wins Cinebench R15 multi-core with 5,355 versus Intel’s 4,976, a 7.6% margin. This is surprising given Intel’s overall multi-core dominance, suggesting the older R15 workload favors AMD’s architecture. The AMD chip also wins PassMark extended instructions (47,802 vs 44,839, a 6.6% delta) and PassMark find prime numbers (251 vs 231, an 8.7% delta). These wins indicate AMD’s Zen 4 design has specific strengths in instruction-level parallelism and certain integer workloads.

Intel’s wins are broad and often decisive. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 49,370 against AMD’s 32,521, a 34.1% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core sees Intel at 6,969 versus 1,917, a 72.5% lead. The single-core delta is the largest in the entire comparison, reflecting Intel’s 6.00 GHz boost clock against AMD’s 5.30 GHz. In Cinebench R15 single-core, Intel leads 702 to 292, a 58.4% gap.

PassMark results show Intel ahead in most throughput tests. Data compression: Intel 785,831 vs AMD 650,984 (17.2% lead). Data encryption: Intel 46,416 vs AMD 39,318 (15.3% lead). Floating point math: Intel 151,918 vs AMD 113,921 (25% lead). Integer math: Intel 209,125 vs AMD 189,221 (9.5% lead). Multithread: Intel 58,405 vs AMD 49,731 (14.9% lead). Physics: Intel 3,159 vs AMD 2,104 (33.4% lead). Random string sorting: Intel 86,564 vs AMD 75,381 (12.9% lead). Single-thread: Intel 4,685 vs AMD 3,874 (17.3% lead).

The pattern shows Intel dominating in floating-point and physics workloads, while AMD’s wins are narrower and more specialized. The 25% floating-point delta is particularly notable given AMD’s 5 nm process advantage. Intel’s 24-core configuration provides a clear multi-core edge in modern Cinebench versions, though AMD’s 16-core design with 64 MB L3 cache holds its own in legacy R15 multi-core.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX | Intel Core i9-14900KF |

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

| Cores | 16 | 24 |

| Threads | 32 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.30 GHz | 6.00 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 125 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Raptor Lake |

| Process Node | 5 nm (TSMC) | 10 nm (Intel) |

| Die Size | 2x 71 mm² | 257 mm² |

| Transistors | 13,140 million | Not listed |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 2 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 36 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | Not listed |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 610M | None |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-04-22 | 2023-10-16 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | $564 |

| Part Number | 100-000001849 | SRN49 |

The Verdict

The Intel Core i9-14900KF is the clear performance leader in the majority of tested workloads. It wins 12 of 15 head-to-head comparisons, with particularly strong showings in Cinebench R23 multi-core (34.1% ahead), Cinebench R23 single-core (72.5% ahead), and PassMark physics (33.4% ahead). The chip’s 24 cores and 6.00 GHz boost clock deliver decisive advantages in both multi-threaded and single-threaded tasks. For users prioritizing maximum throughput in modern rendering, physics simulation, and general compute, the data strongly favors the Intel part. Its support for both DDR4 and DDR5, plus ECC memory, adds flexibility for workstation configurations. The launch MSRP of $564 positions it as a premium desktop option, though pricing should not be weighed further in this analysis.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, despite losing most comparisons, offers distinct advantages that matter in specific contexts. It wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 7.6%, PassMark extended instructions by 6.6%, and PassMark find prime numbers by 8.7%. Its 55 W TDP is less than half of Intel’s 125 W, making it suitable for mobile platforms where thermal and power constraints are critical. The integrated Radeon 610M provides graphics capability that the Intel chip lacks entirely. The AMD part’s PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes exceeds Intel’s 16 lanes, which may benefit I/O-heavy mobile workstation designs. Its 64 MB L3 cache is nearly double Intel’s 36 MB, though benchmark results show this does not translate into overall performance superiority. For mobile users who need a 16-core, 32-thread processor with integrated graphics and lower power draw, the AMD part is the appropriate choice despite its benchmark deficits. The Intel chip’s single-core lead of 72.5% in Cinebench R23 makes it the better option for latency-sensitive applications, while AMD’s architecture demonstrates strength in specific instruction-level workloads.