AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT vs AMD Ryzen 5 8640U Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT and the AMD Ryzen 5 8640U represent two distinct philosophies in processor design: a desktop-focused part built for sustained output versus a mobile part optimized for efficiency. While both share a 6-core, 12-thread configuration, the benchmark data reveals a stark divergence in their performance profiles, with each claiming victories in different workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic divergence in the head-to-head results appears in the Cinebench suite. The Ryzen 5 5500GT posts a massive win in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 15,848 versus the 8640U’s 10,433, a 51.9% advantage. The single-core R23 result is equally lopsided in the desktop part’s favor, with the 5500GT scoring 2,237 compared to 1,651, a 35.5% lead. These are not marginal differences; they represent a generational gap in sustained performance capability, likely reflecting the 5500GT's higher 65W TDP and desktop cooling envelope versus the 28W mobile part.

However, the narrative flips completely in the older Cinebench R15 tests. Here, the Ryzen 5 8640U takes the lead, scoring 1,663 in multi-core versus 1,597 for the 5500GT, a 4% margin. The single-core R15 result is even more decisive for the mobile chip: 256 versus 225, a 12.1% advantage. This inversion is notable—it suggests the 8640U’s higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz, compared to the 5500GT’s 4.40 GHz, provides a short-burst advantage that R15 captures, while the longer R23 workload exposes the desktop part’s superior sustained throughput.

The Passmark suite further complicates the picture. The 5500GT wins in several specific categories: data compression (243,904 vs 230,080, a 6% lead), data encryption (14,754 vs 14,013, a 5.3% lead), and extended instructions (17,027 vs 16,500, a 3.2% lead). These are modest but consistent wins for the desktop chip in memory-bound and complex instruction workloads. Conversely, the 8640U dominates the math-oriented tests. It scores 68,051 in integer math versus 64,218, a 5.6% lead, and 40,330 in floating point math versus 36,694, a 9% lead. The mobile chip also wins in prime number finding (69 vs 54, a 21.7% margin) and physics (1,033 vs 840, an 18.7% margin).

The overall Passmark multi-thread score favors the 8640U at 20,322 versus 19,000, a 6.5% edge, while the single-thread score shows a 13.2% lead for the mobile part (3,534 vs 3,066). Random string sorting also goes to the 8640U by 12.4% (28,066 vs 24,583). In total, the 8640U wins 10 of the 15 head-to-head benchmarks, but the 5500GT’s victories in the newer Cinebench tests are so large that they dominate the overall average benchmark score, where the 5500GT leads with 26,748 versus 26,462.

Architecture Differences

The underlying architectures explain these benchmark splits. The Ryzen 5 5500GT is built on the Zen 3 architecture with the Cezanne codename, manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It contains 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The Ryzen 5 8640U uses the newer Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename, fabricated on a 4 nm process. This newer node packs 25,000 million transistors into a slightly smaller 178 mm² die. The transistor density difference is substantial, reflecting the architectural advancements.

Cache configurations differ in the L2 tier. The 5500GT provides 512 KB of L2 cache per core, while the 8640U doubles that to 1 MB per core. Both share 16 MB of L3 cache, though the 5500GT’s is described as 16 MB total while the 8640U’s is 16 MB shared. The L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core. Memory support also diverges: the desktop part uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus delivering 51.2 GB/s of bandwidth, while the mobile part uses DDR5 with dual-channel support and a much higher 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth. These memory differences likely contribute to the 8640U’s wins in math-intensive Passmark tests.

The platform connectivity differs significantly. The 5500GT uses AMD Socket AM4 with PCIe Gen 3 and 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 8640U uses AMD Socket FP8 with PCIe Gen 4 and 20 lanes. The integrated graphics also vary: the desktop chip pairs with Radeon Vega 7, while the mobile chip carries the newer Radeon 760M. The 5500GT has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the 8640U does not. The 8640U’s base clock is slightly lower at 3.50 GHz versus 3.60 GHz, but its boost clock is higher at 4.90 GHz versus 4.40 GHz. The TDP difference is stark: 65W for the desktop versus 28W for the mobile part.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear, if counterintuitive, conclusion: the desktop 5500GT is not categorically faster than the mobile 8640U, despite its higher TDP and desktop form factor. In the most modern rendering benchmark, Cinebench R23, the 5500GT is decisively superior, with a 51.9% multi-core lead and a 35.5% single-core lead. For users running sustained multi-threaded workloads that scale with time—such as video rendering or 3D scene compilation—the 5500GT is the clear choice based on these scores.

However, the 8640U wins the majority of the benchmark suite, including all Passmark math tests, physics simulation, and single-thread performance as measured by both R15 and Passmark. Its 21.7% advantage in prime number finding and 18.7% lead in physics suggest it excels at bursty, latency-sensitive tasks that benefit from its higher boost clock and newer architecture. The mobile chip also leads in overall Passmark multi-thread score by 6.5%, which contradicts the Cinebench R23 result, indicating that workload composition matters enormously.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical, with the 5500GT at the 79th percentile of all CPUs and the 8640U at the 78th. The average benchmark score favors the 5500GT slightly, at 26,748 versus 26,462, a 1.1% difference. This near-parity in overall standing, despite the massive Cinebench R23 gap, suggests that the 8640U’s wins across many smaller tests compensate for its losses in the heavyweight rendering benchmark. For a buyer, the choice hinges on workload: sustained multi-core rendering favors the 5500GT, while a mix of general computing, math, and bursty tasks favors the 8640U.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 8640U has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, which is higher than the AMD Ryzen 5 5500GT’s 4.40 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500GT has a TDP of 65W, while the Ryzen 5 8640U has a TDP of 28W.

Q: Which chip has a larger L2 cache per core?

A: The Ryzen 5 8640U has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, double the 512 KB per core found on the Ryzen 5 5500GT.

Q: How do they compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500GT scores 15,848, which is 51.9% higher than the Ryzen 5 8640U’s score of 10,433.

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: The Ryzen 5 8640U supports DDR5 memory, while the Ryzen 5 5500GT supports DDR4.

Q: What are their respective percentiles against all CPUs?

A: The Ryzen 5 5500GT is at the 79th percentile, and the Ryzen 5 8640U is at the 78th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 5500GT is the definitive winner in sustained rendering workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 15,848 is a 51.9% improvement over the 8640U, and the single-core R23 score of 2,237 is 35.5% higher. It also wins in data compression (6% ahead), data encryption (5.3% ahead), and extended instructions (3.2% ahead). This profile suits users running long-duration video encodes, 3D rendering, or batch data processing where the desktop part’s thermal headroom and higher TDP allow it to maintain performance over time.

The Ryzen 5 8640U is the winner in bursty, latency-sensitive, and math-heavy tasks. It leads in Passmark physics by 18.7%, floating point math by 9%, integer math by 5.6%, and prime number finding by 21.7%. Its single-thread performance is consistently superior across both R15 (12.1% lead) and Passmark (13.2% lead). The mobile chip also wins in overall Passmark multi-thread score by 6.5% and random string sorting by 12.4%. This makes it the better choice for interactive workloads, scientific calculations, spreadsheet manipulation, and code compilation that benefits from high boost clocks and the newer Zen 4 architecture with its larger L2 cache and higher memory bandwidth.