AMD EPYC 4245P vs AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS and AMD EPYC 4245P occupy opposite ends of the hardware spectrum, yet their average benchmark scores place them within 1% of each other. The mobile-focused Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS posts an average score of 39603, while the server-oriented EPYC 4245P averages 39215, a negligible gap that masks dramatically different performance profiles. The EPYC 4245P dominates 14 of 15 head-to-head tests, but the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS holds one notable victory, and the architectural chasm between Zen 4 mobile and Zen 5 server silicon explains why these chips behave so differently despite their similar overall standings.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The EPYC 4245P’s most decisive victories come in multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC 4245P scores 26618 against the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s 14784, a commanding 44.5% lead. The single-core gap is even more pronounced: the EPYC 4245P’s 3757 score dwarfs the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s 1724, a 54.1% advantage. Cinebench R15 tells a similar story, with the EPYC 4245P winning multi-core 2682 to 2458 (8.4% ahead) and single-core 378 to 271.5 (28.2% ahead). These results indicate the EPYC’s Zen 5 architecture delivers substantially higher instructions per clock than the Zen 4 mobile chip.

The EPYC 4245P also excels in compute-heavy PassMark workloads. In find prime numbers, it scores 193 versus the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s 84, a 56.5% margin that represents the largest single delta in the entire benchmark suite. Physics simulation shows a similar trend, with the EPYC 4245P at 2637 and the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS at 1351, a 48.8% gap. Extended instructions favor the EPYC 4245P by 16% (26547 vs 22298), while floating-point math shows a narrower 3.8% edge (57965 vs 55739). The EPYC 4245P’s integer math advantage is a modest 1.9% (95120 vs 93342), indicating that the two chips are closer in scalar integer workloads than in SIMD or physics-based tasks.

Memory-intensive workloads reveal a smaller but consistent EPYC 4245P edge. Data compression favors it by 8.3% (339408 vs 311199), while random string sorting shows a 5% gap (39916 vs 37922). Multi-threaded PassMark scores put the EPYC 4245P 14.2% ahead (31063 vs 26646), and single-thread performance is 19.3% higher (4575 vs 3692). The sole Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS victory comes in data encryption, where it scores 18838 against the EPYC 4245P’s 18466, a 2% edge that suggests the mobile chip’s integrated memory controller or security features handle encryption primitives slightly better.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their core counts and microarchitectures. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS packs 8 cores and 16 threads using Zen 4 architecture on the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on TSMC’s 4 nm node. The EPYC 4245P counters with 6 cores and 12 threads on the newer Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Grado, also built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. Despite having two fewer cores, the EPYC 4245P achieves higher multi-threaded scores, evidence of Zen 5’s improved per-core efficiency. The transistor counts reflect this design shift: the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS integrates 25,000 million transistors across a 178 mm² die, while the EPYC 4245P uses only 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die — a much smaller chip that still outperforms the larger mobile processor in most tests.

Cache hierarchies also differ substantially. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS offers 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The EPYC 4245P increases L1 to 80 KB per core and doubles the L3 to 32 MB shared, while keeping L2 at 1 MB per core. This doubled L3 capacity likely contributes to the EPYC 4245P’s strong performance in compression and sorting workloads that benefit from larger working sets residing in cache. Clock speeds favor the EPYC 4245P as well: it boosts to 5.40 GHz with a 3.90 GHz base, versus the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s 5.10 GHz boost and 3.30 GHz base. The power envelope tells a different story — the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS sips power at 28 W TDP, while the EPYC 4245P draws 65 W, a 2.3x difference that explains the server chip’s sustained performance headroom.

Platform features separate these chips further. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS uses the AMD Socket FP7 and targets the mobile segment, while the EPYC 4245P uses AMD Socket AM5 for server/workstation duty. Both support dual-channel DDR5 memory with identical 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS provides Gen 4 with 20 CPU lanes, whereas the EPYC 4245P upgrades to Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes, offering both higher bandwidth per lane and more total lanes. Integrated graphics also diverge — the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS carries the Radeon 780M, while the EPYC 4245P ships with a more basic Radeon Graphics solution. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS launched on 2024-04-15, while the EPYC 4245P arrived later on 2025-05-12 with a launch MSRP of $239.

Where Each One Wins

The EPYC 4245P is the clear performance leader across nearly every metric, with its largest advantages in single-threaded rendering (54.1% in Cinebench R23 single-core) and prime number computation (56.5%). These wins point to workloads that rely on raw clock speed and architectural efficiency — the EPYC 4245P’s 5.40 GHz boost and Zen 5 IPC advantage make it ideal for lightly-threaded applications, database queries that depend on single-thread latency, and physics simulations where its 48.8% lead in PassMark physics (2637 vs 1351) would translate to faster game engine or scientific computation. Its 16% edge in extended instructions (26547 vs 22298) suggests better AVX-512 or similar vectorized workload performance, making it suitable for encryption, media encoding, or scientific computing that leverages these instruction sets.

The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s wins are narrower but meaningful. Its 2% data encryption advantage (18838 vs 18466) indicates that mobile users handling encrypted storage or VPN traffic may see a slight edge, despite the EPYC 4245P’s overall superiority. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS also benefits from its integrated Radeon 780M graphics, making it a self-contained solution for thin-and-light laptops where discrete GPUs are impractical. Its 28 W TDP means it can sustain performance in thermally constrained chassis, and its 8-core/16-thread configuration provides more parallel threads than the EPYC 4245P’s 6 cores, which could help in heavily threaded workloads that scale beyond 12 threads — though the benchmark data shows the EPYC 4245P still wins multi-threaded tests by 14.2% in PassMark and 44.5% in Cinebench R23, so the Ryzen’s thread advantage does not translate to real-world wins.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD EPYC 4245P for any performance-sensitive application. It wins 14 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 1.9% in integer math to 54.1% in single-core rendering. Its 44.5% Cinebench R23 multi-core lead over a chip with two more cores and four more threads demonstrates that Zen 5’s per-core performance is transformative. The EPYC 4245P’s 86th percentile ranking versus the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s 87th percentile is misleading — the EPYC sits just 1% below in average score (39215 vs 39603) because the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s encryption win and closer integer math results keep the aggregate close, but the distribution of wins shows the EPYC’s dominance is broad and consistent.

The Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS remains the right choice for mobile platforms where power efficiency and integrated graphics matter more than raw compute. Its 28 W TDP, Radeon 780M, and FP7 socket make it a purpose-built laptop processor, and its 87th percentile ranking confirms it outperforms most CPUs on the market. However, for desktop workstations, servers, or any build where performance is the priority, the EPYC 4245P’s 5.40 GHz boost, 32 MB L3 cache, Gen 5 PCIe, and 65 W TDP make it the superior silicon. The only scenario where the Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS makes sense is if the system absolutely requires its mobile form factor or if the 2% encryption advantage is mission-critical — otherwise, the EPYC 4245P is the benchmark winner by a wide margin.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD EPYC 4245P has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the single-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD EPYC 4245P scores 3757 in Cinebench R23 single-core, which is 54.1% higher than the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS’s 1724.

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

A: Yes, it wins PassMark data encryption with a score of 18838, which is 2% higher than the AMD EPYC 4245P’s 18466.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these processors?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has a TDP of 28 W, while the AMD EPYC 4245P has a TDP of 65 W.

Q: How does L3 cache differ between the two chips?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8840HS has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD EPYC 4245P has 32 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the AMD EPYC 4245P?

A: The AMD EPYC 4245P has a launch MSRP of $239.