AMD Ryzen 5 240 vs AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 and AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS are near-identical twins on paper, sharing the same Zen 4 architecture, Hawk Point codename, 6 cores, 12 threads, and a 45W TDP. Both are built on TSMC’s 4nm process with 25,000 million transistors and a 178 mm² die size. Yet, the benchmark data reveals a nuanced split: the Ryzen 5 240 wins 11 of 15 head-to-head tests, while the Ryzen 5 8645HS takes 4, including the heavier multi-core Cinebench workloads. This page dissects where each chip pulls ahead, what the scores imply for real-world tasks, and which processor the data favors for specific use cases.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence appears in the Cinebench suite, where the older 8645HS consistently outpaces the newer 240 in multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 8645HS scores 13,220 against the 240’s 13,013, a 1.6% lead. The margin is smaller in Cinebench R15 multi-core: 2,094 versus 2,078, a 0.8% advantage. This pattern suggests the 8645HS extracts slightly more sustained throughput from its six Zen 4 cores, even though both chips share identical base and boost clocks of 4.30 GHz and 5.00 GHz.

Single-core performance tells the opposite story. The Ryzen 5 240 wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 1,742 points versus 1,714, a 1.6% edge. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the two are exactly tied at 270 points. This indicates the 240 has a minor but measurable advantage in lightly-threaded workloads, possibly due to better binning or firmware optimizations. The PassMark single-thread test corroborates this: the 240 scores 3,675 against 3,653, a 0.6% win.

Beyond Cinebench, the 240 dominates the PassMark suite, winning 10 of 12 tests. Its largest victory is in PassMark random string sorting, where it scores 32,385 versus 31,748, a 2% improvement. Data encryption shows a 1.7% lead (15,849 vs 15,588), and extended instructions are 1% ahead (20,201 vs 20,003). Floating-point math and integer math also favor the 240 by 1% and 0.8%, respectively. Even in the multithread test, the 240 edges ahead with 22,658 points against 22,586, a slim 0.3% margin.

However, the 8645HS fights back in two notable PassMark tests. In find prime numbers, it scores 75 versus 70, a substantial 6.7% win. Physics performance also favors the 8645HS: 1,095 against 1,060, a 3.2% lead. These wins suggest the 8645HS handles certain integer-heavy or simulation-style workloads more efficiently, even if its overall multithread score trails slightly.

Looking at aggregate metrics, the 240’s average benchmark score is 33,542, placing it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs. The 8645HS averages 33,244, sitting in the 83rd percentile. The delta between their nearest rivals is telling: the 240 is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H (0% delta) and only 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS, while the 8645HS is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14701E and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX. Both chips are firmly in the same performance tier, with the 240 holding a marginal overall edge.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher single-core score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 240 wins in single-core performance. It scores 1,742 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1,714 for the 8645HS, a 1.6% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the 240 scores 3,675 against 3,653, a 0.6% lead.

Q: Does the Ryzen 5 8645HS ever beat the Ryzen 5 240?

A: Yes, in four tests. The 8645HS wins Cinebench R23 multi-core (13,220 vs 13,013) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (2,094 vs 2,078). It also leads in PassMark find prime numbers (75 vs 70) and PassMark physics (1,095 vs 1,060).

Q: Are the two CPUs identical in architecture?

A: Yes, both use the Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, built on TSMC’s 4nm process. They share the same 6-core, 12-thread configuration, 16 MB of shared L3 cache, and a 45W TDP.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores?

A: The Ryzen 5 240 has an average benchmark score of 33,542, while the 8645HS averages 33,244. The 240 holds a 0.9% advantage in this aggregate metric.

Q: How do these CPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The 240 is exactly tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H (0% delta) and 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS. The 8645HS is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-14701E and 0.5% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 7745HX.

Q: Which CPU is better for multi-core rendering?

A: The 8645HS is better for multi-core rendering based on Cinebench results. It leads by 1.6% in R23 multi-core and 0.8% in R15 multi-core, making it the stronger choice for heavily threaded workloads like video rendering.

Architecture Differences

Despite sharing the same Zen 4 architecture and Hawk Point codename, the two processors differ in their release timing and part numbers. The Ryzen 5 8645HS was released on December 5, 2023, while the Ryzen 5 240 followed on January 5, 2025. The newer 240 has a part number of 100-000001727, whereas the 8645HS lists three variants: 100-000001320 (FP7r2), 100-000001385 (FP7), and 100-000001310 (FP8). This suggests the 8645HS was designed for broader socket compatibility across FP7 and FP8 platforms, while the 240 is tied to the FP8 socket.

Both CPUs use the AMD Socket FP8, but the 8645HS’s multiple part numbers hint at potential platform flexibility that the 240 lacks. The core architecture is otherwise identical: 6 cores, 12 threads, 4.30 GHz base clock, 5.00 GHz boost clock, and a 45W TDP. Cache hierarchies match exactly, with 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Memory support is also identical—DDR5 with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth—and neither supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics are the same Radeon 760M, and PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Both are active production parts for the mobile segment. The only notable architectural difference beyond release date and part numbers is the generational label: the 8645HS is part of the 8000 series, while the 240 is simply branded as Ryzen 5 with a Zen 4 (Hawk Point) generation. The benchmark deltas, while small, might stem from subtle firmware or power-management tuning between the two releases, but the underlying silicon appears effectively shared.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow verdict: the AMD Ryzen 5 240 is the better all-around performer, winning 11 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks and holding a higher average score (33,542 vs 33,244) and percentile ranking (84th vs 83rd). Its wins in single-threaded tests, data compression, encryption, and floating-point math suggest it offers slightly better responsiveness and efficiency in everyday applications. The 0.6% single-thread lead and 2% random string sorting advantage are small but consistent.

However, the Ryzen 5 8645HS is the pick for multi-core workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core lead of 1.6% and physics advantage of 3.2% indicate it sustains higher throughput in rendering or simulation tasks. The 8645HS also ties the 240 in Cinebench R15 single-core, so it’s not far behind in single-threaded performance. For users prioritizing video encoding or 3D rendering, the 8645HS is marginally superior.

Given the near-identical specifications, the choice hinges on workload. The 240 is the default recommendation for mixed use, while the 8645HS appeals to those who know their applications are heavily multi-threaded. Neither chip has a decisive edge—the largest delta is just 6.7% in find prime numbers—so the decision should come down to specific benchmark priorities rather than general capability.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in only a few fields, all of which are non-performance related. The release date is the most obvious distinction: the Ryzen 5 240 launched on January 5, 2025, while the Ryzen 5 8645HS arrived on December 5, 2023. The part numbers also differ, with the 240 using 100-000001727 and the 8645HS using 100-000001320 (FP7r2), 100-000001385 (FP7), and 100-000001310 (FP8). This implies the 8645HS supports multiple socket variants (FP7, FP7r2, FP8), while the 240 is restricted to FP8.

The series field is another differentiator: the 8645HS is explicitly listed as part of the 8000 series, whereas the 240 has no series designation. All other core specifications are identical: 6 cores, 12 threads, 4.30 GHz base, 5.00 GHz boost, 45W TDP, AMD Socket FP8, Zen 4 architecture, Hawk Point codename, 4nm TSMC process, 25,000 million transistors, 178 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, 16 MB shared L3, DDR5 dual-channel memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, non-ECC support, Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes, and Radeon 760M integrated graphics. Both are active mobile parts with locked multipliers.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 240 is the winner in most benchmark categories, making it the better choice for general-purpose computing. It excels in single-threaded tasks, as shown by its Cinebench R23 single-core win (1,742 vs 1,714) and PassMark single-thread lead (3,675 vs 3,653). It also dominates data-centric workloads: data compression (267,963 vs 265,483), data encryption (15,849 vs 15,588), and random string sorting (32,385 vs 31,748). For office productivity, web browsing, and light content creation, the 240’s consistent edge in these tests makes it the preferable option.

The AMD Ryzen 5 8645HS wins where raw multi-threaded throughput matters most. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13,220 tops the 240’s 13,013, and it repeats that in R15 multi-core (2,094 vs 2,078). The 8645HS also leads in PassMark physics (1,095 vs 1,060) and find prime numbers (75 vs 70), which are indicative of simulation and integer-heavy computation. If the workload involves 3D rendering, physics simulation, or scientific computing that scales across all 12 threads, the 8645HS holds a small but real advantage.

For everything else, the 240 is the safer bet. It wins the PassMark multithread test (22,658 vs 22,586), floating-point math (45,301 vs 44,833), integer math (73,189 vs 72,640), and extended instructions (20,201 vs 20,003). The 240 also ties the 8645HS in Cinebench R15 single-core, ensuring no single-threaded disadvantage. In short, the 240 is the more balanced processor, while the 8645HS is a specialized tool for multi-core enthusiasts.