AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285K Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the dominant performer in this matchup, winning 14 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX. The single AMD victory, in integer math, does little to offset a performance gap that reaches triple digits in some workloads. While the Ryzen 9 8940HX is a capable mobile processor, the desktop-oriented Core Ultra 9 285K delivers substantially higher raw performance across nearly every measured category, making it the clear choice for users prioritizing maximum compute throughput.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in the PassMark prime number test, where the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K scores 541 against AMD's 251, a massive 115.5% advantage. This indicates a fundamental difference in how each processor handles integer-heavy, branch-intensive workloads. Floating-point math tells a similar story: Intel's score of 224,324 is 96.9% higher than AMD's 113,921, nearly doubling the Ryzen's output.

Cinebench results reinforce Intel's dominance in rendering tasks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 9 285K posts 42,522 versus 32,521 for the Ryzen 9 8940HX, a 30.8% lead. The single-core R23 test shows a 24% gap (2,377 vs 1,917), indicating Intel's architectural efficiency extends beyond just core count. The older Cinebench R15 tests follow the same pattern, with Intel winning multi-core by 21.3% (6,494 vs 5,355) and single-core by 22.9% (359 vs 292).

Encryption performance stands out as another major Intel win. The PassMark data encryption score of 57,745 for Intel is 46.9% higher than AMD's 39,318. This suggests Intel's implementation of cryptographic instructions is significantly more effective. Data compression also favors Intel, with a score of 790,052 versus 650,984, a 21.4% advantage. Extended instruction performance shows a 30.3% gap (62,277 vs 47,802), while random string sorting demonstrates a 25.9% lead (94,927 vs 75,381).

The multithreaded PassMark score of 67,260 for Intel versus 49,731 for AMD represents a 35.2% difference, and the physics test shows an 87.2% gap (3,938 vs 2,104). Single-thread performance in PassMark gives Intel a 31.3% edge (5,087 vs 3,874). The lone AMD win comes in PassMark integer math, where the Ryzen 9 8940HX scores 189,221 versus Intel's 172,379, an 8.9% advantage. This isolated result suggests AMD's Zen 4 architecture has particular strengths in certain integer operations, but it does not translate into broader performance superiority.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K uses the Arrow Lake architecture on a 3 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX is built on Zen 4 (Dragon Range) using a 5 nm process. Intel's die size is 243 mm² with 17,800 million transistors, whereas AMD uses a dual-chiplet design totaling 2x 71 mm² with 13,140 million transistors. This gives Intel a denser, more integrated design.

Core configurations diverge sharply. Intel employs 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning no hyperthreading, while AMD offers 16 cores and 32 threads thanks to simultaneous multithreading. Intel's base clock of 3.70 GHz is significantly higher than AMD's 2.40 GHz, and the boost clock also favors Intel at 5.70 GHz versus 5.30 GHz. Cache layouts differ as well: Intel provides 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, plus 36 MB shared L3, while AMD offers 64 KB L1 and 1 MB L2 per core, with a larger 64 MB L3 pool.

The power envelope tells a story of different market positioning. Intel's TDP is 125 W, suited for desktop cooling solutions, while AMD's 55 W TDP reflects its mobile Dragon Range design. Both support dual-channel DDR5 memory, but Intel achieves 102.4 GB/s bandwidth versus AMD's 83.2 GB/s. Intel also supports ECC memory, which AMD does not. PCIe lane allocation favors AMD with 28 Gen 5 lanes (CPU only), compared to Intel's 20 Gen 5 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ notably: Intel includes Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while AMD pairs its processor with the Radeon 610M. Both processors have unlocked multipliers, but Intel's desktop socket (Socket 1851) versus AMD's mobile socket (Socket FL1) reinforces their distinct target platforms. Intel was released on 2024-10-23 with a launch MSRP of $589; AMD followed on 2025-04-22.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K wins all multi-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 42,522 versus 32,521 for the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, a 30.8% advantage. The PassMark multithread test shows a 35.2% gap (67,260 vs 49,731).

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX wins PassMark integer math with a score of 189,221 compared to Intel's 172,379, an 8.9% advantage. This is the only benchmark in the head-to-head comparison where AMD comes out ahead.

Q: How do their core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX has 16 cores and 32 threads. Intel relies on more physical cores without hyperthreading, while AMD uses fewer cores with simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: Intel has a base clock of 3.70 GHz and a boost clock of 5.70 GHz. AMD has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. Intel's clocks are higher in both metrics.

Q: Which processor uses more power?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K has a TDP of 125 W, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX has a TDP of 55 W. This reflects Intel's desktop positioning versus AMD's mobile design.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: Intel achieves 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, while AMD achieves 83.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR5 memory, but Intel's implementation provides higher theoretical throughput.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 285K | AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX |

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

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.70 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 55 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket FL1 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Zen 4 |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | 13,140 million |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | 2x 71 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 36 MB (shared) | 64 MB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 28 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | Radeon 610M |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-10-23 | 2025-04-22 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the superior processor in nearly every measurable way. With 14 wins out of 15 benchmarks, Intel demonstrates overwhelming superiority in multi-core rendering (30.8% ahead in Cinebench R23 multi-core), single-core performance (24% ahead in Cinebench R23 single-core), and specialized workloads like encryption (46.9% ahead) and prime number finding (115.5% ahead). The average benchmark score of 83,807 for Intel versus 81,103 for AMD reflects this consistent advantage, even though both processors sit at the 96th and 95th percentiles respectively.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX is not without merit. Its 8.9% win in integer math and its 55 W TDP indicate that AMD has engineered an efficient mobile processor. However, the data shows that efficiency does not translate into competitive performance in this comparison. The Ryzen's 32 threads versus Intel's 24 do not compensate for the lower clock speeds and smaller L1/L2 caches, resulting in losses across Cinebench and PassMark tests.

For users who need maximum processing power, the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K is the definitive choice. It offers higher clocks, more cores, better memory bandwidth, and ECC support, all within a desktop platform that can sustain its 125 W TDP. The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, with its mobile socket and lower power draw, is better suited for laptop implementations where battery life and thermal constraints matter more than raw performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285K wins in every performance category except one. It excels in rendering workloads (Cinebench R15/R23 multi-core and single-core), demonstrating its strength in 3D modeling, video editing, and other creative applications. Encryption and data compression tasks favor Intel significantly, making it suitable for database management, file archiving, and secure communication workloads. Floating-point math and physics simulations show near-double performance, ideal for scientific computing and engineering analysis. Single-threaded applications, from legacy software to modern productivity tools, benefit from Intel's 31.3% single-thread advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX wins specifically in PassMark integer math, where its score of 189,221 exceeds Intel's 172,379. This suggests AMD's architecture processes certain integer operations more efficiently, potentially benefiting specific types of algorithmic computations, financial modeling, or cryptography that rely on integer arithmetic. However, this single victory is insufficient to recommend the Ryzen for general-purpose use over the Intel part.

Beyond benchmarks, the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX offers advantages in power efficiency with its 55 W TDP, making it the appropriate choice for mobile workstations and gaming laptops where battery life is critical. Its 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide more connectivity for peripherals, and its smaller dual-chiplet die design (2x 71 mm²) allows for more flexible laptop layouts. The Ryzen's larger 64 MB L3 cache could benefit workloads with high cache reuse, although the benchmark data does not show this translating into wins outside of integer math.