AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus and the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX represent two distinct approaches to high-end computing, with the former targeting the desktop segment and the latter designed for mobile platforms. The benchmark data reveals a clear divergence in performance characteristics, with Intel dominating most workloads but AMD securing specific victories in integer math and an older multi-core rendering test. The Intel part claims 13 wins out of 15 head-to-head comparisons, while the AMD processor takes the remaining two, suggesting that the choice between them hinges on workload-specific priorities rather than overall capability.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus establishes its dominance across a broad spectrum of computational tasks, but its most pronounced advantages appear in single-threaded and floating-point workloads. In the Cinebench R23 single-core test, the Intel processor scores 7303 against AMD’s 1917, a staggering 281% delta that indicates a massive per-thread performance gap. Similarly, the Cinebench R15 single-core result shows Intel leading by 152.1% with a score of 736 versus 292. These results point to a clear winner for lightly-threaded applications such as legacy software, certain game engines, and everyday desktop responsiveness.

The Intel chip also excels in floating-point mathematics, scoring 214760 in Passmark’s floating-point math test compared to AMD’s 113921, a 88.5% advantage. This extends to physics simulations, where Intel’s 3315 score beats AMD’s 2104 by 57.6%. The Passmark find prime numbers test shows Intel’s 503 versus AMD’s 251, a 100.4% delta, further reinforcing the pattern of Intel’s strength in arithmetic-heavy tasks. Multithreaded performance also favors Intel, with the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 51731 versus 32521, a 59.1% lead, and the Passmark multithread score of 60860 versus 49731, a 22.4% advantage.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX, despite losing the majority of comparisons, secures two notable victories. The first is in the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, where it scores 5355 against Intel’s 5214, a 2.6% win. This older benchmark, which may not scale as well with Intel’s architecture, shows AMD’s 16-core, 32-thread configuration outperforming Intel’s 24-core, 24-thread design in this specific test. The second victory is more significant: Passmark integer math shows AMD at 189221 versus Intel’s 166194, a 12.2% lead. This suggests that AMD’s Zen 4 architecture has a particular strength in integer-heavy operations, which could benefit database workloads, cryptography, and certain types of scientific computing.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their core design philosophies. The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is built on a 3 nm process node from TSMC, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX uses a 5 nm process from the same foundry. This process advantage allows Intel to pack 24 cores and 24 threads, whereas AMD offers 16 cores and 32 threads. The threading discrepancy is notable: Intel’s 24 cores operate without hyperthreading, while AMD’s 16 cores each support two threads, resulting in 32 total threads.

The cache hierarchy differs substantially between the two. Intel provides 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, with a shared 36 MB L3 cache. AMD counters with 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a larger 64 MB L3 cache. This larger L3 on the AMD side could explain its competitive performance in certain multi-threaded scenarios, despite the core count disadvantage. The Intel chip also features a larger die size at 243 mm² versus AMD’s dual-die design at 2x 71 mm², and Intel’s transistor count of 17,800 million exceeds AMD’s 13,140 million.

Both processors support DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, but Intel’s memory bandwidth is rated at 115.2 GB/s compared to AMD’s 83.2 GB/s. Intel also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the AMD part. PCIe connectivity shows another divergence: Intel provides 20 CPU lanes of Gen 5, while AMD offers 28 lanes of Gen 5. The integrated graphics differ as well, with Intel featuring Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while AMD includes the Radeon 610M. Clock speeds reveal a significant gap, with Intel’s base clock at 3.70 GHz and boost at 5.80 GHz, versus AMD’s 2.40 GHz base and 5.30 GHz boost.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test delivers the largest absolute margin in the comparison, with Intel scoring 51731 against AMD’s 32521, a 59.1% advantage. This result, combined with the Cinebench R15 multi-core outcome where AMD wins by 2.6%, suggests that newer multi-threaded workloads favor Intel’s architecture, while older benchmarks may not fully utilize its capabilities. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows an even more extreme gap, with Intel’s 7303 surpassing AMD’s 1917 by 281%, highlighting a fundamental difference in per-core performance.

Passmark results paint a consistent picture of Intel dominance in most areas. Data encryption shows Intel at 52563 versus AMD’s 39318, a 33.7% lead, indicating faster cryptographic operations. Data compression favors Intel at 698346 versus 650984, a 7.3% margin. Extended instructions, which test SIMD and other specialized instruction sets, show Intel ahead by 9.5% with a score of 52338 versus 47802. Random string sorting, a test of memory access patterns and integer operations, gives Intel a 5.8% edge at 79744 versus 75381.

The two AMD victories warrant closer examination. The Cinebench R15 multi-core win, while narrow, could be attributed to AMD’s higher thread count in a test that may not scale perfectly with Intel’s core layout. More importantly, the Passmark integer math result shows AMD at 189221 versus Intel’s 166194, a 12.2% advantage. This is the largest AMD win in any benchmark and suggests that AMD’s Zen 4 architecture handles integer-heavy instruction streams more efficiently than Intel’s design, despite the latter’s higher clock speeds. The single-thread Passmark test shows Intel at 4823 versus AMD’s 3874, a 24.5% lead, reinforcing the pattern that Intel wins on per-thread performance while AMD holds a niche in integer throughput.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus for users who prioritize raw performance in most modern workloads. Its 281% advantage in Cinebench R23 single-core and 59.1% lead in multi-core make it the obvious choice for content creation, 3D rendering, and any application that benefits from high single-threaded speed. The 88.5% lead in floating-point math and 100.4% advantage in prime number finding further cement its position for scientific and engineering tasks. The Intel chip’s 96th percentile ranking among all CPUs, compared to AMD’s 95th, reinforces its overall standing.

The AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX becomes the preferred option in two specific scenarios. First, its 12.2% lead in integer math makes it suitable for workloads that are heavily integer-bound, such as certain database operations, financial modeling, or compression algorithms that rely on integer arithmetic. Second, its Cinebench R15 multi-core win, while modest, might appeal to users running legacy software that behaves similarly to this older benchmark. However, the AMD processor’s lower base clock of 2.40 GHz and TDP of 55 watts, compared to Intel’s 3.70 GHz and 125 watts, indicate it is designed for mobile platforms where power efficiency matters more than absolute performance.

For desktop users building a high-performance system, the Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus offers superior performance in 13 out of 15 benchmarks, making it the default recommendation. The AMD part’s strengths in integer math could sway users with specific workloads, but the overall data suggests Intel’s architecture provides a more balanced and faster experience across the board. The Intel processor also offers ECC memory support and a higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which may be deciding factors for workstation users.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus is significantly faster in single-core tests. It leads by 281% in Cinebench R23 single-core (7303 vs 1917) and by 152.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core (736 vs 292).

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

A: Yes, the AMD processor wins two out of 15 head-to-head comparisons. It beats Intel in Cinebench R15 multi-core (5355 vs 5214, a 2.6% lead) and Passmark integer math (189221 vs 166194, a 12.2% lead).

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX has 16 cores and 32 threads. AMD uses simultaneous multithreading to achieve more threads than cores, while Intel does not.

Q: What are the process node differences between the two chips?

A: The Intel processor is fabricated on a 3 nm process node from TSMC, while the AMD processor uses a 5 nm process node, also from TSMC. The smaller node gives Intel a potential efficiency and density advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX does not. This may be relevant for workstation users who require error-correcting memory for data integrity.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel processor offers a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, while the AMD processor provides 83.2 GB/s. Both support DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 9 290K Plus | AMD Ryzen 9 8940HX |

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

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 24 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 3.70 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.80 GHz | 5.30 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 55 W |

| 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 | 115.2 GB/s | 83.2 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

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

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

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | AMD Socket FL1 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake Refresh | Zen 4 (Dragon Range) |