Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS vs Apple M3 Max 16-Core

Aggregate performance score

Apple M3 Max 16-Core
2023
16 cores / 16 threads, 78 Watt
25.81
+45.7%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
17.72

Apple M3 Max 16-Core outperforms Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS by a considerable 46% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Apple M3 Max 16-Core and Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking189345
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesApple M3AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)
Power efficiency31.3247.91
Architecture codenameno dataPhoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date30 October 2023 (1 year ago)13 June 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

Apple M3 Max 16-Core and Ryzen 9 PRO 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed2.748 GHz4 GHz
Boost clock speed4.06 GHz5.2 GHz
L1 cacheno data512 KB
L2 cacheno data8 MB
L3 cacheno data16 MB
Chip lithography3 nm4 nm
Die sizeno data178 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors92000 Millionno data
64 bit support++

Compatibility

Information on Apple M3 Max 16-Core and Ryzen 9 PRO 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.

Socketno dataFP7/FP8
Power consumption (TDP)78 Watt35 Watt

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Apple M3 Max 40-Core GPUAMD Radeon 780M

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.

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 25.81
+45.7%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 17.72

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.

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 41003
+45.7%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 28144

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 3264
+38.3%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 2360

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.

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 271
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 275
+1.5%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 22938
+130%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 9959

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 2325
+18.8%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 1956

WebXPRT 3

Apple M3 Max 16-Core 421
+42.2%
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS 296

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 25.81 17.72
Recency 30 October 2023 13 June 2023
Physical cores 16 8
Chip lithography 3 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 78 Watt 35 Watt

Apple M3 Max 16-Core has a 45.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, 100% more physical cores, and a 33.3% more advanced lithography process.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, on the other hand, has 122.9% lower power consumption.

The Apple M3 Max 16-Core is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M3 Max 16-Core and Ryzen 9 PRO 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.


Apple M3 Max 16-Core
M3 Max 16-Core
AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
Ryzen 9 PRO 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.


3 267 votes

Rate Apple M3 Max 16-Core on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 45 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Apple M3 Max 16-Core or Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.