CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-9100F and the Intel Core i7-4940MX represent two very different eras of Intel design, yet they land in the same performance tier. The data shows a near-total deadlock in raw compute benchmarks, with the i7-4940MX taking a narrow lead in six of eight tests, while the i3-9100F counters with decisive wins in Geekbench workloads. The average benchmark scores tell the story: 1903 for the i3-9100F against 1886 for the i7, a gap of less than one percent. Both sit at the 43rd percentile among all CPUs, placing them in identical company. The choice between them is less about outright speed and more about platform, memory support, and specific workload characteristics.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-4940MX claims victory in the Cinebench suite across the board, though the margins are remarkably thin. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 580 against the i3-9100F’s 574, a 1% edge. The pattern repeats in R20 multicore (2418 vs 2392, a 1.1% lead) and R23 multicore (5759 vs 5697, also 1.1%). Single-core Cinebench results follow the same script: the i7 wins R15 single-core 81 to 80 (1.2%), R20 single-core 341 to 337 (1.2%), and R23 single-core 813 to 804 (1.1%). These are not performance gaps that will be felt in everyday use; they are statistical noise levels. However, the consistency across all six Cinebench tests suggests the i7-4940MX has a slight architectural advantage in rendering workloads.

The Intel Core i3-9100F finds its wins in Geekbench, and these are far more substantial. In Geekbench multicore, it scores 3962 against the i7’s 3869, a 2.4% advantage. The single-core result is where the i3 truly separates itself: 1378 versus 1227, a commanding 12.3% lead. This is the largest delta between the two processors in any test. For workloads that stress single-threaded integer or floating-point performance, such as older games, legacy applications, or lightly threaded productivity tools, the i3-9100F is the clear choice. The data indicates that the i3’s newer Coffee Lake architecture delivers significantly better per-core efficiency than the older Haswell design.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental split between these two chips is generational and architectural. The i3-9100F is built on Coffee Lake, a 14 nm process, while the i7-4940MX uses Haswell on Intel’s 22 nm node. This process difference explains much of the performance behavior: the i3 achieves higher clock speeds and better single-thread performance despite having fewer threads. The i3 runs at a 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.20 GHz boost, compared to the i7’s 3.10 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost. Both have four physical cores, but the i7 doubles the thread count with Hyper-Threading, offering 8 threads versus the i3’s 4.

Cache configurations also differ meaningfully. The i3-9100F has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, matching the i7, but the i7 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache versus the i3’s 6 MB. This extra cache helps the i7 in multi-threaded rendering, explaining its narrow Cinebench wins. The i7 also has a larger die at 177 mm² and packs 1,400 million transistors, while the i3’s die is 126 mm². The i7 is a mobile Extreme edition part with an unlocked multiplier, whereas the i3 is a locked desktop chip. The i7 includes Intel HD 4600 integrated graphics; the i3-9100F has none, as indicated by the "F" suffix.

Memory support is another significant divergence. The i3 supports DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the i7 is limited to DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. This memory bandwidth difference likely contributes to the i3’s strong Geekbench multicore showing, as memory-intensive tasks benefit from the faster DDR4 interface. The i3 also supports ECC memory, which the i7 does not. Both use PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The i3 fits Intel Socket 1151, while the i7 uses Intel Socket G3, making them incompatible at the platform level.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head table reveals a clear pattern: the i7-4940MX wins every Cinebench test by roughly one percent, and the i3-9100F wins both Geekbench tests by substantially more. The largest single-core margin is Geekbench single-core, where the i3 leads by 12.3%. This is the standout result in the entire comparison. In absolute terms, 1378 versus 1227 is a difference of 151 points, a meaningful jump for single-threaded responsiveness. The Geekbench multicore win for the i3 is 3962 versus 3869, a 93-point gap, or 2.4%.

The Cinebench results, by contrast, show the i7’s edge is never more than 1.2%. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i7 scores 580 against 574; in R15 single-core, it is 81 to 80. The R20 results are 2418 versus 2392 (multicore) and 341 versus 337 (single-core). The R23 numbers are 5759 versus 5697 (multicore) and 813 versus 804 (single-core). These are marginal wins, but they are consistent across every Cinebench iteration, suggesting the i7’s extra cache and thread count provide a genuine, if small, advantage in rendering workloads that scale with threads and cache. The i3’s wins are larger but confined to Geekbench, which may reflect better memory bandwidth utilization and newer core design.

Netting out, the i7 wins 6 of 8 benchmarks, but the aggregate impact favors the i3. The i3’s average benchmark score is 1903, while the i7’s is 1886. The i3 also sits at the 43rd percentile, identical to the i7, meaning they are statistically indistinguishable in the broader CPU landscape. The nearest rivals for the i3 include the AMD Ryzen 3 5125C at a 0.1% delta and the Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3 at -0.2%. The i7’s nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon D-1531 at 0.1% and the Intel Xeon E3-1270L v4 at 0.2%. Both chips occupy the same crowded performance band.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-9100F is faster in Geekbench single-core, scoring 1378 against the i7-4940MX’s 1227, a 12.3% advantage. However, the i7 wins all three Cinebench single-core tests by about 1.1-1.2%, with scores of 81 versus 80 in R15, 341 versus 337 in R20, and 813 versus 804 in R23.

Q: Does the i7-4940MX beat the i3-9100F in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Yes, in Cinebench multi-core tests. The i7 wins R15 multicore 580 to 574, R20 multicore 2418 to 2392, and R23 multicore 5759 to 5697, each by roughly 1%. But the i3 wins Geekbench multicore 3962 to 3869, a 2.4% margin, so the outcome depends on the specific benchmark.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for these two CPUs?

A: Both have 4 physical cores. The i3-9100F has 4 threads, while the i7-4940MX has 8 threads due to Hyper-Threading support. The i7’s extra threads contribute to its Cinebench multicore wins.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The i3-9100F supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel access and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The i7-4940MX supports DDR3 with dual-channel access and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. The i3 also supports ECC memory; the i7 does not.

Q: Are these processors on the same socket?

A: No. The i3-9100F uses Intel Socket 1151, while the i7-4940MX uses Intel Socket G3. They are not interchangeable and require different motherboards.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: Only the i7-4940MX has integrated graphics, featuring Intel HD 4600. The i3-9100F has no integrated graphics, as indicated by the "F" in its name, so a discrete GPU is required.

The Verdict

The benchmark data paints a clear picture of two processors that achieve similar average performance through different means. The Intel Core i7-4940MX edges out the i3-9100F in six of eight benchmarks, but the margins are tiny, never exceeding 1.2%. Its wins come in Cinebench, where the extra four threads and 8 MB of L3 cache provide a slight edge in rendering workloads. The i7 also carries the legacy of a mobile Extreme edition, with an unlocked multiplier and integrated graphics, and it was launched at a premium MSRP of $1096.

The Intel Core i3-9100F, meanwhile, wins the two most important modern benchmarks by larger margins. Its 12.3% Geekbench single-core lead and 2.4% Geekbench multicore lead indicate that the newer Coffee Lake architecture delivers superior per-clock efficiency and better memory throughput. With DDR4 support and 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth, the i3 is better suited to contemporary workloads that rely on memory speed. Its launch MSRP was $122, reflecting a budget positioning, but the data shows no performance penalty for that lower price.

For users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness and memory bandwidth, the i3-9100F is the stronger choice. For those running heavily threaded rendering tasks that scale with cache and threads, the i7-4940MX holds a narrow but consistent edge. Both processors are end-of-life products, so platform availability and motherboard compatibility will likely decide the matter. The data does not support a definitive winner; it supports a workload-specific decision. Choose the i3 for modern efficiency and Geekbench-heavy tasks, or the i7 for Cinebench rendering and its extra threads.