| | | | | | |

Ryzen 9 4900HS vs Core i9-10900KF


Description
The 4900HS is based on Zen 2 architecture while the i9-10900KF is based on Comet Lake.

Using the multithread performance as a reference, the 4900HS gets a score of 360.6 k points while the i9-10900KF gets 825.5 k points.

Summarizing, the i9-10900KF is 2.3 times faster than the 4900HS. To get a proper comparison between both models, take a look to the data shown below.

Specs
CPUID
860f01
a0655
Core
Renoir
Comet Lake-S
Architecture
Base frecuency
3 GHz
3.7 GHz
Boost frecuency
4.3 GHz
5.2 GHz
Socket
BGA 1140
LGA 1200
Cores/Threads
8/16
10/20
TDP
35 W
125 W
Cache L1 (d+i)
8x32+8x32 kB
10x32+10x32 kB
Cache L2
8x512 kB
10x256 kB
Cache L3
2x4096 kB
20480 kB
Date
March 2020
April 2020
Mean monothread perf.
53k points
90.37k points
Mean multithread perf.
360.57k points
825.47k points

AVX2 optimized benchmark
The benchmark in mode III (AVX2), like AVX1, is optimized to used 256 bits registers beside the second version of the Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX). The first AVX2 compatible CPU was released in 2013.
Monothread
4900HS
i9-10900KF
Test#1 (Integers)
14.87k
35.87k (x2.41)
Test#2 (FP)
21.53k
31.43k (x1.46)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
8.39k
7.34k (x0.87)
Test#1 (Memory)
8.21k
15.73k (x1.91)
TOTAL
53k
90.37k (x1.7)

Multithread

4900HS

i9-10900KF
Test#1 (Integers)
124.63k
377.56k (x3.03)
Test#2 (FP)
158.62k
347.59k (x2.19)
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
69.79k
88.08k (x1.26)
Test#1 (Memory)
7.53k
12.24k (x1.62)
TOTAL
360.57k
825.47k (x2.29)

Performance/W
4900HS
i9-10900KF
Test#1 (Integers)
3561 points/W
3020 points/W
Test#2 (FP)
4532 points/W
2781 points/W
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1994 points/W
705 points/W
Test#1 (Memory)
215 points/W
98 points/W
TOTAL
10302 points/W
6604 points/W

Performance/GHz
4900HS
i9-10900KF
Test#1 (Integers)
3457 points/GHz
6898 points/GHz
Test#2 (FP)
5007 points/GHz
6044 points/GHz
Test#3 (Generic, ZIP)
1952 points/GHz
1411 points/GHz
Test#1 (Memory)
1910 points/GHz
3025 points/GHz
TOTAL
12326 points/GHz
17378 points/GHz

Monothread performance graph
Monothread performance graphics gives the performance vs time. They are useful to measure the time it takes to the CPU to reach the maximum performance.

Usually, CPU's performance will be steady during these tests but if it has a slow frequency strategy, the first samples will show a lower score.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Multithread performance graph
Multithread graphs measure the performance against a heavy load during certain time.

If CPU's TDP doesn't limit the frequency and the machine is properly cooled, performance should remain steady vs time. Otherwise, the performance score will oscillate or decrease over time.


Test#1 (Integers) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#2 (FP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#3 (Generic, ZIP) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com


Test#1 (Memory) [points vs time]

grafica bm.hardlimit.com

Hardlimit Benchmark Central - Ver. 3.11.4