AMD Ryzen 5 5600HS vs AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT, which wins three of the four head-to-head tests. The largest margin comes in multi-core workloads, where the 3800XT delivers a 42.7% advantage over the Ryzen 5 5600HS in Cinebench R15 multi-core, scoring 2230 against 1563. That gap is substantial and reflects the 3800XT’s higher core and thread count, as well as its higher boost clock. In Geekbench multi-core, the 3800XT again leads, posting 8561 versus 6395, a 33.9% advantage. These results indicate that for heavily threaded tasks, the 3800XT is in a different class entirely.

Single-core results are closer but still favor the 3800XT. In Geekbench single-core, the 3800XT scores 1773 against 1569, a 13% lead. The only test the 5600HS wins is Cinebench R15 single-core, where it edges out the 3800XT by a slim 1.8% margin, scoring 223 versus 219. That narrow win suggests the 5600HS has a slightly more efficient single-thread implementation in that specific workload, but the broader Geekbench single-core result contradicts that, giving the 3800XT a solid advantage. Looking at the database percentiles, the 3800XT sits at the 55th percentile among all CPUs, while the 5600HS is at the 54th percentile, so both are near the middle of the pack, but the 3800XT holds a slight overall edge in average benchmark score: 3515 versus 3447.

The nearest rivals for the 3800XT include the Intel Xeon E-2176G, which trails by 0.4%, and the Intel Xeon W-2135, which leads by 0.4%. The 5600HS, meanwhile, is virtually tied with the Intel Core i7-10870H at a 0% delta, and it leads the AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS by 0.1%. These rival comparisons place both processors in similar competitive territory, but the head-to-head data clearly separates them: the 3800XT dominates in multi-threaded scenarios, while the 5600HS only manages a marginal single-core win in one test.

The data also shows the 3800XT’s 3DMark scores, which are not part of the head-to-head set but provide additional context. The 3800XT achieves 6307 in 16-thread, 6294 in max-thread, 4743 in 8-thread, 2795 in 4-thread, and 1475 in 2-thread tests. These numbers are not directly compared to the 5600HS, but they confirm the 3800XT’s strong scaling across thread counts. The 5600HS has no corresponding 3DMark entries in the database, so a direct comparison is not possible, but the existing head-to-head results are sufficient to establish the overall performance hierarchy.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT wins three of the four head-to-head tests, while the AMD Ryzen 5 5600HS wins only one.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the 3800XT leads by 42.7%, scoring 2230 against 1563.

Q: Does the 5600HS win any benchmark by a significant margin?

A: No, the 5600HS wins only Cinebench R15 single-core by a narrow 1.8% margin, scoring 223 versus 219.

Q: How do the two compare in Geekbench single-core performance?

A: The 3800XT leads by 13%, scoring 1773 versus 1569 in Geekbench single-core.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The 3800XT has an average benchmark score of 3515, while the 5600HS has an average score of 3447.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The 3800XT ranks at the 55th percentile, while the 5600HS ranks at the 54th percentile.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for most use cases. The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT is the stronger processor overall, winning three of four head-to-head tests and posting a 42.7% multi-core advantage in Cinebench R15. Its Geekbench multi-core score is 33.9% higher, and its single-core Geekbench score is 13% higher. Anyone prioritizing multi-threaded performance, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or compiling, should select the 3800XT without hesitation. The only scenario where the 5600HS looks better is in the single Cinebench R15 single-core test, where it leads by 1.8%, but that is a negligible margin and is contradicted by the larger Geekbench single-core deficit.

The 5600HS is a mobile processor with a 35W TDP, so it is designed for laptops and low-power systems. Its performance is respectable, sitting near the 3800XT in average score, but it cannot match the 3800XT in raw throughput. The 3800XT also has a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz versus 4.20 GHz, and it supports PCIe Gen 4, whereas the 5600HS is limited to Gen 3. For desktop users with an AM4 socket, the 3800XT is the clear pick. For mobile users who need efficiency over raw power, the 5600HS is a valid option, but the benchmark data shows it loses decisively in most tests.

The percentile rankings reinforce this: both are near the 55th percentile, but the 3800XT edges ahead. The average benchmark score difference of 68 points is small in absolute terms, but the head-to-head deltas are large, especially in multi-core. The verdict is that the 3800XT is the better performer, and the 5600HS is only preferable in scenarios where the 35W TDP and mobile socket are mandatory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The 3800XT has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the 5600HS has 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 3.80 GHz for the 3800XT and 3.00 GHz for the 5600HS. Boost clocks are 4.70 GHz and 4.20 GHz, respectively. The 3800XT has a TDP of 105W, while the 5600HS is rated at 35W. Sockets differ: the 3800XT uses AMD Socket AM4, while the 5600HS uses AMD Socket FP6. The 3800XT has 32 MB of L3 cache, whereas the 5600HS has 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory bandwidth also differs, with the 3800XT at 51.2 GB/s and the 5600HS at 68.3 GB/s. The 3800XT supports PCIe Gen 4, while the 5600HS supports Gen 3. The 5600HS includes integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics, while the 3800XT has no integrated graphics. The 3800XT has an unlocked multiplier, while the 5600HS does not. The 3800XT is a desktop part, while the 5600HS is a mobile part.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, but their architectures differ. The 3800XT uses Zen 2, codenamed Matisse 2, and belongs to the 3000 series. The 5600HS uses Zen 3, codenamed Cezanne, and belongs to the 5000 series. The transistor counts are vastly different: the 3800XT has 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, while the 5600HS has 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. This reflects the 5600HS’s integrated graphics and larger memory controller. The 3800XT has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, matching the 5600HS, but the L3 cache is 32 MB for the 3800XT versus 16 MB shared for the 5600HS. The 5600HS’s integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics is a major architectural addition absent from the 3800XT. The 3800XT’s PCIe Gen 4 support is a newer standard than the 5600HS’s Gen 3, which affects bandwidth to expansion cards and NVMe drives. The release dates differ: the 3800XT launched on 2020-07-06, while the 5600HS launched on 2021-01-11. The 3800XT has a launch MSRP of $399, while the 5600HS has no recorded launch MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 3800XT wins in all multi-threaded workloads. Its 42.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 33.9% lead in Geekbench multi-core make it the clear choice for tasks like video rendering, 3D modeling, software compilation, and any application that can use 16 threads. Its higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz also gives it an edge in single-threaded Geekbench, where it leads by 13%. The 3800XT is also the better option for desktop users who want PCIe Gen 4 support and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Its 105W TDP is a drawback for power-sensitive builds, but the performance payoff is evident in the data.

The AMD Ryzen 5 5600HS wins only in Cinebench R15 single-core, by 1.8%, which is within margin of error and not a meaningful advantage. Its real strengths lie outside the benchmark scores: it has a 35W TDP, making it far more energy-efficient, and it includes Radeon Vega 7 integrated graphics, eliminating the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its higher memory bandwidth of 68.3 GB/s versus 51.2 GB/s suggests better memory subsystem efficiency, though the benchmark data does not show a corresponding performance win. The 5600HS is the right choice for thin-and-light laptops, where the 3800XT cannot fit due to its desktop socket and 105W power draw. For any performance-sensitive task, the 3800XT wins; for mobile efficiency and integrated graphics, the 5600HS is the only option. The data is unambiguous: the 3800XT is the superior processor, and the 5600HS is a niche product for low-power mobile use.