Ryzen 9 7940HS vs Ryzen 7 3700X

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 3700X
2019
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
14.24
Ryzen 9 7940HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
19.20
+34.8%

Ryzen 9 7940HS outperforms Ryzen 7 3700X by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking508301
Place by popularity73not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation18.04no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7no data
Power efficiency20.6551.70
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores8 (Octa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed3.6 GHz4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz5.2 GHz
L1 cache512 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache4 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache32 MB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm4 nm
Die sizeno data178 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors19,200 million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FP8
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataRyzen AI, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR5
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon 780M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 7 3700X 14.24
Ryzen 9 7940HS 19.20
+34.8%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Ryzen 7 3700X 22538
Ryzen 9 7940HS 30388
+34.8%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 7 3700X 1671
Ryzen 9 7940HS 2460
+47.2%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 7 3700X 8081
Ryzen 9 7940HS 11560
+43.1%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 7 3700X 5839
Ryzen 9 7940HS 7837
+34.2%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 7 3700X 40439
Ryzen 9 7940HS 48751
+20.6%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Ryzen 7 3700X 13815
Ryzen 9 7940HS 15689
+13.6%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 7 3700X 3.71
Ryzen 9 7940HS 2.7
+37.4%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 7 3700X 23
Ryzen 9 7940HS 30
+31.5%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 7 3700X 2092
Ryzen 9 7940HS 2661
+27.2%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 7 3700X 204
Ryzen 9 7940HS 284
+39%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 7 3700X 2.3
Ryzen 9 7940HS 3.38
+47%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 7 3700X 11.4
Ryzen 9 7940HS 15.1
+32.5%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 7 3700X 115
Ryzen 9 7940HS 144
+25.3%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 7 3700X 270
Ryzen 9 7940HS 293
+8.5%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 7 3700X 7503
+0.2%
Ryzen 9 7940HS 7490

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 7 3700X 8960
Ryzen 9 7940HS 12111
+35.2%

Blender(-)

Ryzen 7 3700X 181
Ryzen 9 7940HS 189
+4.2%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 7 3700X 1304
Ryzen 9 7940HS 1986
+52.3%

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 7 3700X 5333
Ryzen 9 7940HS 6652
+24.7%

7-Zip

Ryzen 7 3700X 57307
Ryzen 9 7940HS 71086
+24%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.24 19.20
Chip lithography 7 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

Ryzen 9 7940HS has a 34.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 7940HS is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 7 3700X in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 7 3700X is a desktop processor while Ryzen 9 7940HS is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 3700X and Ryzen 9 7940HS, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
Ryzen 7 3700X
AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS
Ryzen 9 7940HS

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 5323 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 3700X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 992 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 7940HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 3700X or Ryzen 9 7940HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.