AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS vs AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U Comparison

Both processors are 6-core, 12-thread mobile parts from AMD, yet their benchmark results place them in distinctly different performance tiers. The data shows the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U takes every recorded victory, 17 wins to zero, with margins that vary from roughly 27% to 45% depending on the workload. This is not a close contest by the numbers, but the differences in where each chip wins and loses reveal a clear architectural story.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 7533HS does not win any of the 17 recorded benchmarks. Its rival, the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U, wins all of them. The more useful observation is not who wins, but by how much, and that margin tells two different stories. In single-thread and lightly threaded tasks, the 8640U leads by roughly 27% to 38%. In multi-threaded and memory-heavy workloads, the lead expands to 32% to 45%. The largest single margin appears in PassMark random string sorting, where the 8640U is 45% ahead, a task that stresses memory latency and branch handling. The smallest margin is 26.6% in PassMark single-thread performance.

The 8640U also holds a substantial advantage in Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 19,982 against 12,342 for the 7533HS, a 38.2% gap. That pattern repeats across R15, R20, and R23, with the delta consistently near 38%. The 8640U pulls further ahead in extended instructions, where it leads by 41.4%, and in floating-point math, where it leads by 38.6%. For integer math, the gap narrows to 32.2%, and for data encryption, it is 32.3%. The 8640U wins everywhere, but the margin is not uniform, suggesting specific strengths in certain instruction paths rather than a simple clock speed advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different generations and use different microarchitectures. The Ryzen 5 7533HS is built on Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, part of the 7000 series. The Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U uses Zen 4, codenamed Hawk Point, part of the 8000 series. The manufacturing process differs as well: the 7533HS uses a 6 nm process from TSMC, while the 8640U uses a 4 nm process from the same foundry. The die size also shrinks from 208 mm² to 178 mm², and the 8640U has a transistor count listed at 25,000 million, whereas the 7533HS has no listed transistor figure.

Cache configurations differ at the L2 level. Both chips share 64 KB of L1 per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The 7533HS provides 512 KB of L2 per core, while the 8640U doubles that to 1 MB per core. That additional L2 cache likely contributes to the 8640U's advantage in latency-sensitive workloads, particularly random string sorting and extended instructions. Memory bandwidth also increases, from 76.8 GB/s on the 7533HS to 89.6 GB/s on the 8640U, despite both supporting DDR5 on a dual-channel bus.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 7533HS includes a Radeon 660M, while the 8640U includes a Radeon 760M. The 8640U also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the 7533HS. Both use the same AMD Socket FP7 and have Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes (CPU only). The 8640U has a lower TDP of 28 watts compared to 35 watts for the 7533HS, which is notable because the 8640U delivers higher performance at a lower power envelope. The 8640U also has higher clocks: a base of 3.50 GHz and a boost of 4.90 GHz, versus 3.30 GHz and 4.40 GHz for the 7533HS.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 8640U scores 2,014 against 1,243 for the 7533HS, a 38.3% difference. The single-core R15 result shows a similar gap: 284 versus 175, a 38.4% difference. Cinebench R20 multi-core repeats the pattern with 8,392 versus 5,183, a 38.2% gap, and R20 single-core shows 1,184 versus 731, also a 38.3% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives 19,982 versus 12,342, a 38.2% gap, while R23 single-core gives 2,821 versus 1,742, a 38.2% gap. These Cinebench results are remarkably consistent, all falling within a narrow band around 38%.

PassMark results show more variation. Data compression scores 260,925 versus 168,692, a 35.3% gap. Data encryption shows a smaller margin at 32.3%, with 15,843 versus 10,718. Extended instructions produce the second-largest gap at 41.4%, with 19,130 versus 11,219. Finding prime numbers yields 78 versus 48, a 38.5% gap. Floating-point math scores 45,265 versus 27,800, a 38.6% gap. Integer math shows 74,875 versus 50,800, a 32.2% gap. The multithread PassMark score is 22,795 versus 14,520, a 36.3% gap. Physics scores 1,154 versus 821, a 28.9% gap. Random string sorting shows the largest difference at 45%, with 32,114 versus 17,669. Single-thread scores are 3,732 versus 2,740, a 26.6% gap.

The pattern suggests that the 8640U's advantage grows in workloads that stress the memory subsystem and instruction-level parallelism. Random string sorting, extended instructions, and floating-point math all show gaps above 38%, while integer math and encryption show gaps around 32%. Single-thread performance shows the smallest gap at 26.6%, indicating that the per-core clock advantage is real but not the primary driver of the overall performance difference.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several specification fields. The 7533HS has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz, while the 8640U has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. TDP is 35 watts for the 7533HS and 28 watts for the 8640U. Process node is 6 nm for the 7533HS and 4 nm for the 8640U, both from TSMC. Die size is 208 mm² for the 7533HS and 178 mm² for the 8640U. The 8640U lists a transistor count of 25,000 million, while the 7533HS has no listed count.

Cache differs only at L2: 512 KB per core for the 7533HS versus 1 MB per core for the 8640U. L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core, and L3 is identical at 16 MB shared. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory support is absent on the 7533HS and present on the 8640U. Integrated graphics are a Radeon 660M versus a Radeon 760M. The architecture changes from Zen 3+ to Zen 4, and the codename changes from Rembrandt-R to Hawk Point. The series changes from 7000 to 8000. The release dates differ, with the 8640U releasing earlier at 2024-04-15 and the 7533HS later at 2024-08-31. Both use AMD Socket FP7 and have Gen 4 PCIe with 20 lanes. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and neither has a listed launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U is faster in every multi-core benchmark. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 19,982 versus 12,342, a 38.2% advantage. PassMark multithread shows 22,795 versus 14,520, a 36.3% gap.

Q: How large is the single-thread performance gap?

A: The smallest gap across all tests is in single-thread performance. PassMark single-thread scores are 3,732 for the 8640U and 2,740 for the 7533HS, a 26.6% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 2,821 versus 1,742, a 38.2% gap.

Q: Do the two processors share the same cache layout?

A: L1 and L3 are identical: 64 KB per core and 16 MB shared, respectively. The difference is in L2 cache, where the 8640U has 1 MB per core versus 512 KB per core on the 7533HS.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The 8640U supports 89.6 GB/s, while the 7533HS supports 76.8 GB/s. Both use DDR5 on a dual-channel bus.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The 8640U has a TDP of 28 watts, while the 7533HS has a TDP of 35 watts. The 8640U delivers higher performance at a lower power envelope.

Q: Do the processors support ECC memory?

A: The 8640U supports ECC memory, while the 7533HS does not.

Q: Which integrated graphics are included?

A: The 7533HS includes a Radeon 660M, and the 8640U includes a Radeon 760M.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy. The Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U outperforms the Ryzen 5 7533HS in every recorded benchmark, with no exceptions across 17 tests. The smallest margin is 26.6% in single-thread performance, and the largest is 45% in random string sorting. The 8640U achieves this while consuming less power, with a TDP of 28 watts versus 35 watts, and while using a smaller die on a more advanced process node.

The 7533HS remains a functional 6-core part with a 73rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, but its rival sits at the 81st percentile. The 8640U's average benchmark score is 30,254, compared to 19,364 for the 7533HS, a gap that places the 8640U near the AMD Ryzen 7 2700X and Intel Core i9-11980HK in the database, while the 7533HS sits near the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V and Intel Core i5-1345U.

For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, the 8640U still leads by a meaningful margin. For multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, or data compression, the 8640U's lead grows to roughly 35% to 38%. For memory-intensive sorting or extended instruction workloads, the lead exceeds 40%. The 7533HS offers no recorded advantage in any test, making the choice straightforward: the Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U is the superior part across all measured dimensions. Users who require ECC memory or higher memory bandwidth will find those features only on the 8640U, and the lower TDP combined with higher clocks makes it the more efficient option based on the recorded data.