
Core i9-11900H
Popular choices:

Ryzen 5 8640HS
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
Core i9-11900H
2021Why buy it
- ✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 16 MB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 8640HS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌25% higher power demand at 35W vs 28W.
- ❌Older platform position on FCBGA1787 with DDR4, while Ryzen 5 8640HS moves to FP8 and DDR5.
Ryzen 5 8640HS
2023Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 28W instead of 35W, a 7W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA1787 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,851 vs 20,009).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 24 MB).
Core i9-11900H
2021Ryzen 5 8640HS
2023Why buy it
- ✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
- ✅+50% larger total L3 cache (24 MB vs 16 MB).
Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +11.0% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Draws 28W instead of 35W, a 7W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on FP8 with DDR5 support instead of FCBGA1787 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 5 8640HS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌25% higher power demand at 35W vs 28W.
- ❌Older platform position on FCBGA1787 with DDR4, while Ryzen 5 8640HS moves to FP8 and DDR5.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (19,851 vs 20,009).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (16 MB vs 24 MB).
Quick Answers
So, is Ryzen 5 8640HS better than Core i9-11900H?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i9-11900H | Ryzen 5 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 247 FPS | 261 FPS |
| medium | 230 FPS | 237 FPS |
| high | 193 FPS | 199 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 171 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 220 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 185 FPS | 190 FPS |
| high | 150 FPS | 155 FPS |
| ultra | 133 FPS | 137 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 154 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 131 FPS | 133 FPS |
| high | 101 FPS | 103 FPS |
| ultra | 89 FPS | 91 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i9-11900H | Ryzen 5 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 314 FPS | 371 FPS |
| medium | 267 FPS | 309 FPS |
| high | 226 FPS | 272 FPS |
| ultra | 206 FPS | 236 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 259 FPS | 313 FPS |
| medium | 230 FPS | 270 FPS |
| high | 201 FPS | 244 FPS |
| ultra | 174 FPS | 207 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 160 FPS | 234 FPS |
| medium | 144 FPS | 206 FPS |
| high | 136 FPS | 191 FPS |
| ultra | 121 FPS | 161 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i9-11900H | Ryzen 5 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| high | 488 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 388 FPS | 496 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| high | 426 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 345 FPS | 443 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 428 FPS | 493 FPS |
| medium | 368 FPS | 435 FPS |
| high | 324 FPS | 372 FPS |
| ultra | 259 FPS | 308 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i9-11900H | Ryzen 5 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| high | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| high | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| ultra | 476 FPS | 496 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 500 FPS | 496 FPS |
| medium | 458 FPS | 496 FPS |
| high | 405 FPS | 442 FPS |
| ultra | 348 FPS | 380 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i9-11900H and Ryzen 5 8640HS

Core i9-11900H
Core i9-11900H
The Core i9-11900H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 May 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Tiger Lake-H (2021) architecture. It features 8 cores and 16 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 1.25 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm SuperFin process technology. Socket: FCBGA1787. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 20,009 points. Launch price was $546.


Ryzen 5 8640HS
Ryzen 5 8640HS
The Ryzen 5 8640HS is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 6 December 2023 (1 year ago). It is based on the Hawk Point-HS (Zen 4) (2023−2024) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 16 MB (total). L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 4 nm process technology. Socket: FP8. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 19,851 points. Launch price was $299.
Processing Power
The Core i9-11900H packs 8 cores / 16 threads, while the Ryzen 5 8640HS offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Core i9-11900H has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core i9-11900H versus 4.9 GHz on the Ryzen 5 8640HS — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i9-11900H uses the Tiger Lake-H (2021) architecture (10 nm SuperFin), while the Ryzen 5 8640HS uses Hawk Point-HS (Zen 4) (2023−2024) (4 nm). In PassMark, the Core i9-11900H scores 20,009 against the Ryzen 5 8640HS's 19,851 — a 0.8% lead for the Core i9-11900H. L3 cache: 24 MB (total) on the Core i9-11900H vs 16 MB (total) on the Ryzen 5 8640HS.
| Feature | Core i9-11900H | Ryzen 5 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 8 / 16+33% | 6 / 12 |
| Boost Clock | 4.9 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.1 GHz | 3.5 GHz+67% |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB (total)+50% | 16 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core)+25% | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 10 nm SuperFin | 4 nm-60% |
| Architecture | Tiger Lake-H (2021) | Hawk Point-HS (Zen 4) (2023−2024) |
| PassMark | 20,009 | 19,851 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i9-11900H uses the FCBGA1787 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 5 8640HS uses FP8 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core i9-11900H | Ryzen 5 8640HS |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1787 | FP8 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 4.0+33% | PCIe 3.0 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.











