AMD EPYC 4244P vs AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits this comparison into two distinct profiles. The AMD EPYC 4244P wins 13 of the 15 head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS wins only 2. The EPYC part dominates in CPU-centric workloads: all Cinebench versions, data compression, encryption, extended instruction handling, prime number finding, multithreaded tasks, physics simulation, random string sorting, and single-thread performance. The Ryzen 7 takes the two remaining tests, both math-oriented: floating point math and integer math.

The distribution of wins reveals a clear pattern. The EPYC 4244P is the stronger processor for sustained, multi-threaded compute and for single-core responsiveness. Its largest victory comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 23089 against the Ryzen 7's 13082, a 76.5% advantage. The single-core gap in Cinebench R23 is even more pronounced in percentage terms: 3259 versus 1737, an 87.6% delta. These are not marginal differences; they represent a full performance tier separation.

The Ryzen 7 8840HS wins in floating point math (52582 vs 45546, a 13.4% lead) and integer math (90382 vs 78709, a 12.9% lead). These wins are notable because the Ryzen 7 has more cores (8 vs 6) and more threads (16 vs 12), which likely contributes to its advantage in parallel math throughput. However, the EPYC counters with a substantial lead in prime number finding (187 vs 79, a 136.7% delta), a test that often rewards higher per-core efficiency and cache behavior.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD EPYC 4244P records an average benchmark score of 34220, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS records 33667. Both sit at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The EPYC 4244P scores 23089 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 76.5% higher than the Ryzen 7 8840HS's 13082. This is the largest multi-core delta in the head-to-head results.

Q: Does the Ryzen 7 8840HS win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, it wins two: PassMark floating point math (52582 vs 45546) and PassMark integer math (90382 vs 78709). Both wins exceed 12% margins.

Q: What is the single-thread performance difference?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the EPYC 4244P scores 3710 versus the Ryzen 7's 3626, a 2.3% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap is much larger: 3259 vs 1737, an 87.6% delta.

Q: How do the two compare in data compression?

A: The EPYC 4244P scores 302606 in PassMark data compression, which is 3.3% ahead of the Ryzen 7's 292888. The encryption test shows the same 3.3% delta in favor of the EPYC.

Q: What about physics simulation performance?

A: The EPYC 4244P leads by 72.4% in PassMark physics (1981 vs 1149), a decisive advantage that suggests better sustained compute behavior under load.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results deliver the most striking contrasts. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the EPYC 4244P scores 2327 against 2045 for the Ryzen 7, a 13.8% win. Single-core in R15 shows the EPYC at 328 versus 270, a 21.5% advantage. Moving to Cinebench R23, the EPYC's multi-core score of 23089 dwarfs the Ryzen 7's 13082, a 76.5% gap. The single-core R23 result is even more lopsided: 3259 versus 1737, an 87.6% delta. These numbers indicate that the EPYC 4244P does not merely edge ahead in rendering workloads; it outperforms by a wide margin.

PassMark results paint a more mixed picture. The EPYC wins data compression (302606 vs 292888, 3.3%), data encryption (18232 vs 17650, 3.3%), extended instructions (22149 vs 20714, 6.9%), prime numbers (187 vs 79, 136.7%), multithread (26797 vs 24990, 7.2%), physics (1981 vs 1149, 72.4%), random string sorting (38048 vs 35517, 7.1%), and single-thread (3710 vs 3626, 2.3%). The Ryzen 7 counters with floating point math (52582 vs 45546, 13.4% lead) and integer math (90382 vs 78709, 12.9% lead).

The prime number test is worth examining closely. A 136.7% delta is the largest percentage difference in the entire comparison, and it suggests the EPYC's per-core efficiency and cache configuration handle this workload far better. The physics test, with a 72.4% delta, reinforces that pattern. Meanwhile, the Ryzen 7's math wins indicate that its higher core count and thread count provide a genuine advantage in certain parallel arithmetic workloads, even if the EPYC dominates elsewhere.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The EPYC 4244P has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 8840HS has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks differ: 3.80 GHz for the EPYC versus 3.30 GHz for the Ryzen 7. Both boost to 5.10 GHz. TDP is a major differentiator: the EPYC is rated at 65 watts, the Ryzen 7 at 28 watts. The EPYC uses AMD Socket AM5, the Ryzen 7 uses AMD Socket FP8. Memory bandwidth also differs: the EPYC lists 83.2 GB/s, the Ryzen 7 lists 89.6 GB/s, despite both supporting dual-channel DDR5. The EPYC supports ECC memory; the Ryzen 7 does not. PCIe generation and lane counts differ: the EPYC offers Gen 5 with 28 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen 7 offers Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The EPYC has a launch MSRP of $229; the Ryzen 7's launch MSRP is not recorded. The EPYC released on 2024-05-20, the Ryzen 7 on 2023-12-05.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use TSMC fabrication, but on different nodes. The EPYC 4244P is built on a 5 nm process with 6,570 million transistors and a die size of 71 mm². The Ryzen 7 8840HS uses a 4 nm process with 25,000 million transistors and a die size of 178 mm². Both are Zen 4 architecture, but the EPYC belongs to the Raphael codename family within the EPYC 4004 series, while the Ryzen 7 belongs to the Hawk Point codename within the 8000 series. L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core, and L2 cache is 1 MB per core for both. L3 cache differs: the EPYC has 32 MB shared, the Ryzen 7 has 16 MB shared. Integrated graphics also differ: the EPYC includes Radeon Graphics, while the Ryzen 7 includes Radeon 780M. The market segment separates them: Server/Workstation for the EPYC, Mobile for the Ryzen 7. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are active in production.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward choice based on workload. The AMD EPYC 4244P is the stronger processor for multi-threaded compute, single-core responsiveness, and server-style tasks. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23089 versus 13082, its 87.6% single-core lead, and its 72.4% physics advantage make it the clear pick for rendering, simulation, and any workload that rewards raw CPU throughput. The fact that it achieves this with 6 cores and 12 threads against the Ryzen 7's 8 cores and 16 threads underscores the efficiency of its design.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS wins only in floating point and integer math, with 13.4% and 12.9% leads respectively. Those wins are real but narrow in scope. For users whose primary workloads are arithmetic-heavy, the Ryzen 7 offers a measurable benefit. Its 28-watt TDP also makes it the appropriate choice for power-constrained mobile systems, though the database does not record any thermal or power efficiency benchmarks to quantify that advantage.

Overall, the EPYC 4244P wins 13 of 15 direct comparisons and holds a higher average benchmark score (34220 vs 33667). The Ryzen 7's two math wins do not offset the EPYC's dominance across Cinebench, compression, encryption, physics, and multithreaded tests. The recorded data recommends the EPYC 4244P for anyone prioritizing compute performance, while the Ryzen 7 8840HS remains relevant for math-focused parallel tasks and mobile deployment.