AMD EPYC 4245P vs AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS and AMD EPYC 4245P represent two distinct interpretations of AMD’s current silicon, one aimed at high-end mobile workstations and the other at entry-level servers. Despite their differences in core count, socket, and market segment, the aggregate benchmark data places them remarkably close: the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS averages 39,325 points across all tests, while the EPYC 4245P averages 39,215 points, a mere 0.3% separation. This near-parity in overall score, however, masks significant divergence in specific workloads, with the EPYC winning 12 of 17 head-to-head comparisons and the Ryzen taking 5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the head-to-head data is the EPYC 4245P’s dominance in multi-threaded rendering workloads, where it consistently outperforms the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS by exactly 7.7% across all Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the EPYC scores 26,618 against the Ryzen’s 24,565. The same 7.7% margin appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (11,179 vs 10,317) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (2,682 vs 2,476). This consistency suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The single-core Cinebench results tell the same story. The EPYC 4245P leads by 7.7% in Cinebench R15 single-core (378 vs 349), Cinebench R20 single-core (1,577 vs 1,456), and Cinebench R23 single-core (3,757 vs 3,468). This uniform margin across both single- and multi-core rendering indicates that the EPYC’s advantage scales with clock speed and IPC, not just core count.

The EPYC’s largest victory comes in PassMark’s find prime numbers test, where it scores 193 versus the Ryzen’s 87, a massive 54.9% lead. This is the single biggest delta in the entire comparison and points to a substantial difference in integer arithmetic efficiency. PassMark physics also heavily favors the EPYC, with scores of 2,637 versus 1,389, a 47.3% advantage. The multithreaded PassMark test shows an 8% lead for the EPYC (31,063 vs 28,572).

The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS, despite losing the majority of tests, wins the remaining categories by smaller margins. Its best result is in data encryption, where it scores 20,487 against the EPYC’s 18,466, a 10.9% advantage. This is the only test where the Ryzen leads by double digits. In data compression, the Ryzen wins 343,952 to 339,408, a slim 1.3% margin. Floating point math goes to the Ryzen by 1.7% (58,965 vs 57,965), and integer math by 2.6% (97,625 vs 95,120). Random string sorting also favors the Ryzen, 41,867 vs 39,916, a 4.9% edge.

The most telling single-threaded result outside of Cinebench is PassMark single-thread, where the EPYC 4245P scores 4,575 against the Ryzen’s 3,762, an 17.8% lead. This is a much larger single-thread advantage than the Cinebench numbers suggest, indicating that the EPYC’s Zen 5 cores have a significant raw-speed edge in certain instruction paths.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher overall average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has a marginally higher average benchmark score of 39,325, compared to the AMD EPYC 4245P’s 39,215. The difference is only 0.3%, placing them at statistical parity.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The AMD EPYC 4245P leads in Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 26,618, versus 24,565 for the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS. This represents a 7.7% advantage for the EPYC.

Q: In which workload does the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS show its largest lead?

A: The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS shows its largest lead in PassMark data encryption, scoring 20,487 against the EPYC’s 18,466, a 10.9% advantage.

Q: What is the biggest performance difference between the two processors?

A: The biggest difference is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the AMD EPYC 4245P scores 193 versus the Ryzen’s 87, a 54.9% lead for the EPYC.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS and the AMD EPYC 4245P are in the 86th percentile against all CPUs, according to the benchmark data.

Q: Which processor has a higher PassMark single-thread score?

A: The AMD EPYC 4245P has a significantly higher PassMark single-thread score of 4,575, compared to the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS’s 3,762, a difference of 17.8%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures, despite sharing the same 4nm TSMC process node. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS uses the Zen 4 architecture under the codename Hawk Point, while the EPYC 4245P uses the newer Zen 5 architecture under the codename Grado. This architectural gap explains much of the performance differential, particularly in single-threaded workloads where the EPYC’s newer design delivers higher IPC.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the EPYC 4245P has only 6 cores and 12 threads. Despite having two fewer cores, the EPYC manages to win most multi-threaded tests, indicating that its Zen 5 cores are substantially more efficient per-thread than the Zen 4 cores in the Ryzen.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has a 64 KB L1 cache per core and a 16 MB shared L3 cache. The EPYC 4245P has a larger 80 KB L1 cache per core and a 32 MB shared L3 cache, double the L3 capacity. Both have 1 MB L2 cache per core.

Clock speeds favor the EPYC. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The EPYC 4245P has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, giving it a 0.3 GHz advantage at both ends.

The transistor counts and die sizes are dramatically different, despite the same process node. The Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the EPYC 4245P has only 8,315 million transistors on a 70.6 mm² die. This reflects the different design goals: the Ryzen integrates a powerful Radeon 780M iGPU, while the EPYC uses a more modest Radeon Graphics solution.

Memory support is similar, with both supporting DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both also support ECC memory. The PCIe implementation differs, with the Ryzen offering Gen 4 with 20 lanes and the EPYC offering Gen 5 with 24 lanes.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear picture for different use cases. The AMD EPYC 4245P is the superior choice for compute-heavy workloads that depend on raw multi-threaded throughput and single-thread speed. Its 7.7% lead across all Cinebench versions, 8% lead in PassMark multithread, and massive 54.9% lead in prime number finding make it the dominant performer for rendering, scientific computing, and server-side integer workloads. The 17.8% lead in PassMark single-thread further cements its position for latency-sensitive applications.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS, while behind in raw compute, wins in specific areas that matter for certain workloads. Its 10.9% lead in data encryption and 4.9% lead in random string sorting suggest advantages in security-related tasks and certain data processing pipelines. Its 1.7% lead in floating point math and 2.6% lead in integer math indicate that it holds its own in general arithmetic, despite losing to the EPYC in the more specialized prime number test.

For a mobile workstation or compact system where power efficiency is paramount, the Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS’s 45W TDP versus the EPYC’s 65W TDP makes it the practical choice. The Ryzen’s integrated Radeon 780M is also far more capable than the EPYC’s basic Radeon Graphics, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in many scenarios.

For a server or workstation where performance per watt is less critical than raw throughput, the EPYC 4245P is the clear winner. It delivers higher scores in the majority of benchmarks, uses the newer Zen 5 architecture, and offers PCIe Gen 5 connectivity. Its launch MSRP is $239.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 8845HS | AMD EPYC 4245P |

|---|---|---|

| Series | 8000 series | EPYC 4005 series |

| Cores | 8 | 6 |

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Hawk Point | Grado |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | 8,315 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 70.6 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 16 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 24 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 780M | Radeon Graphics |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Server/Workstation |

| Release Date | 2024-04-15 | 2025-05-12 |

| Part Number | 100-000001316(FP7r2),100-000001387(FP7) | 100-000001555 |