AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS vs AMD Ryzen 7 260 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unequivocal: the AMD Ryzen 7 260 wins all 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS. There is no single test where the Ryzen 5 7533HS takes the lead, making this a one-sided performance matchup. The largest gaps appear in memory-intensive and instruction-heavy workloads, while the smallest gap appears in single-core Cinebench R23.

The most dramatic difference is in PassMark random string sorting, where the Ryzen 7 260 scores 42,383 against the Ryzen 5 7533HS's 17,669, a 58.3% advantage. This workload benefits heavily from the Ryzen 7 260's additional cores and higher clock speeds. Similarly, PassMark extended instructions shows a 57.7% lead (26,544 vs. 11,219), indicating a substantial edge in SIMD and complex instruction execution.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ryzen 7 260 delivers 2,747.5 points versus 1,243 for the Ryzen 5 7533HS, a 54.8% margin. This is the second-largest gap in the dataset. The Ryzen 7 260 also leads by 53.2% in PassMark floating point math (59,462 vs. 27,800) and by 52% in PassMark data compression (351,517 vs. 168,692). These results reflect the Ryzen 7 260's 8-core, 16-thread configuration outperforming the 6-core, 12-thread Ryzen 5 7533HS across parallel workloads.

The Ryzen 7 260 shows a 48.3% lead in PassMark multithread (28,078 vs. 14,520) and a 47.5% lead in PassMark integer math (96,737 vs. 50,800). Data encryption also favors the Ryzen 7 260 by 47.1% (20,267 vs. 10,718). These are typical results for a processor with two additional physical cores and four additional threads.

Single-threaded performance tells a similar story, though with smaller margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen 7 260 scores 1,770.5 versus 1,742 for the Ryzen 5 7533HS, a modest 1.6% advantage. This near-tie suggests that per-core IPC is similar, with the Ryzen 7 260's higher boost clock (5.10 GHz vs. 4.40 GHz) providing only a slight edge. However, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the gap widens to 36.7% (276.5 vs. 175), and in PassMark single-thread, the Ryzen 7 260 leads by 26.7% (3,736 vs. 2,740). The discrepancy between Cinebench R23 and R15 results may reflect different workload sensitivities, but the overall pattern is consistent: the Ryzen 7 260 wins every single-thread test.

PassMark physics shows a 32.6% lead for the Ryzen 7 260 (1,218 vs. 821), while PassMark find prime numbers shows a 37.7% lead (77 vs. 48). These results align with the core-count advantage. The smallest overall margin remains Cinebench R23 single-core at 1.6%, while the largest is random string sorting at 58.3%. Across all tests, the Ryzen 7 260's average benchmark score is 43,717, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen 5 7533HS averages 19,364, placing it in the 73rd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different architectural generations. The AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS uses Zen 3+ architecture with the Rembrandt-R codename, part of the 7000 series. The AMD Ryzen 7 260 uses Zen 4 architecture with the Hawk Point codename. This generational leap brings several fundamental changes.

The process node differs significantly: the Ryzen 5 7533HS is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the Ryzen 7 260 uses TSMC's 4 nm process. The Ryzen 7 260 also has a smaller die size at 178 mm² compared to 208 mm² for the Ryzen 5 7533HS, despite having more cores. The Ryzen 7 260's transistor count is listed at 25,000 million, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS has no recorded transistor count in the database.

Core configuration is the most visible difference. The Ryzen 5 7533HS has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 3.30 GHz for the Ryzen 5 7533HS and 3.80 GHz for the Ryzen 7 260. Boost clocks are 4.40 GHz and 5.10 GHz respectively. The TDP also differs: 35 watts for the Ryzen 5 7533HS versus 45 watts for the Ryzen 7 260.

Cache hierarchies diverge in L2 cache. The Ryzen 5 7533HS has 512 KB of L2 per core, while the Ryzen 7 260 has 1 MB per core. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L2 cache on the Ryzen 7 260 likely contributes to its performance advantage in data-heavy workloads.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, with dual-channel buses. However, memory bandwidth differs: the Ryzen 5 7533HS supports 76.8 GB/s, while the Ryzen 7 260 supports 89.6 GB/s. This 12.8 GB/s difference may explain some of the Ryzen 7 260's advantage in memory-sensitive benchmarks like random string sorting.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ryzen 5 7533HS includes Radeon 660M, while the Ryzen 7 260 includes Radeon 780M. Both processors use AMD Socket FP7 and AMD Socket FP8 respectively, which are not interchangeable. The Ryzen 5 7533HS has part numbers 100-000001632(FP7) and 100-000001634(FP7r2), while the Ryzen 7 260 has part number 100-000001724. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Ryzen 7 260 was released on 2025-01-05, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS was released on 2024-08-31. Both are currently marked as Active in production. Both support PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), and neither supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS has 6 cores and 12 threads.

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

A: The largest gap is in PassMark random string sorting, where the Ryzen 7 260 leads by 58.3% (42,383 vs. 17,669).

Q: How close are the two in single-core performance?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen 7 260 leads by only 1.6% (1,770.5 vs. 1,742), but in Cinebench R15 single-core the gap is 36.7% (276.5 vs. 175), and in PassMark single-thread it is 26.7% (3,736 vs. 2,740).

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A: The Ryzen 5 7533HS has a TDP of 35 watts, while the Ryzen 7 260 has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory?

A: Both support DDR5 with dual-channel buses, but memory bandwidth differs: 76.8 GB/s for the Ryzen 5 7533HS and 89.6 GB/s for the Ryzen 7 260.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS uses a 6 nm process from the same foundry.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS | AMD Ryzen 7 260 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.30 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Zen 4 |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Hawk Point |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | not recorded | 25,000 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 178 mm² |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

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

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | Radeon 780M |

| Release Date | 2024-08-31 | 2025-01-05 |

| Part Number | 100-000001632(FP7), 100-000001634(FP7r2) | 100-000001724 |

| Generation | Ryzen 5 (Zen 3+ (Rembrandt)) | Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 (Hawk Point)) |

The two processors share several specifications: both use DDR5 memory, dual-channel memory buses, PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), no ECC support, no unlocked multiplier, and both are mobile market segment parts with active production status. L1 cache is 64 KB per core for both, and L3 cache is 16 MB shared for both.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 260 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so the "where each one wins" section is determined by the magnitude of those wins and the workload characteristics. The Ryzen 7 260's largest advantages appear in workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth: random string sorting (58.3% lead), extended instructions (57.7% lead), Cinebench R15 multicore (54.8% lead), floating point math (53.2% lead), and data compression (52% lead). These are heavily parallel tasks where the additional 2 cores and 4 threads, combined with the larger L2 cache and higher memory bandwidth, produce outsized gains.

The Ryzen 7 260 also dominates in encryption (47.1% lead), integer math (47.5% lead), multithread (48.3% lead), and prime number finding (37.7% lead). For single-threaded work, the Ryzen 7 260's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz gives it a 26.7% lead in PassMark single-thread and a 36.7% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core. The only near-tie is Cinebench R23 single-core at 1.6%, which suggests that for certain light single-threaded tasks, the two processors are nearly indistinguishable.

The Ryzen 5 7533HS, with zero wins in the dataset, does not have a benchmark category where it outperforms the Ryzen 7 260. Its lower TDP of 35 watts versus 45 watts could imply lower power draw in sustained workloads, but the database provides no power consumption measurements to confirm this. Its smaller die size advantage belongs to the Ryzen 7 260 (178 mm² vs. 208 mm²), and its older Zen 3+ architecture does not compensate for the core deficit.

The Verdict

The recorded data makes the decision straightforward. The AMD Ryzen 7 260 outperforms the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS in every measured benchmark, with an average benchmark score of 43,717 compared to 19,364. The Ryzen 7 260 sits in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ryzen 5 7533HS sits in the 73rd percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 (0% delta) and AMD Ryzen 7 170 (0.1% delta), while the Ryzen 5 7533HS's nearest rivals are Intel Core Ultra 5 226V (0% delta) and Intel Core i5-1345U (-0.2% delta).

For users whose workloads are heavily multithreaded (rendering, data compression, encryption, scientific computing), the Ryzen 7 260's 8-core, 16-thread configuration with 4 nm Zen 4 architecture delivers between 28.3% and 58.3% higher scores than the Ryzen 5 7533HS, depending on the specific test. Even in single-threaded tasks, the Ryzen 7 260 leads by 1.6% to 36.7%, so there is no scenario in the benchmark data where the Ryzen 5 7533HS is the better choice on performance alone.

The Ryzen 5 7533HS does offer a lower TDP (35 W vs. 45 W), which may matter in thermally constrained mobile designs. Its 6-core configuration with 12 threads is still capable for general productivity. However, the Ryzen 7 260 provides a higher memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s vs. 76.8 GB/s), a newer architecture (Zen 4 vs. Zen 3+), a smaller process node (4 nm vs. 6 nm), and a more powerful integrated GPU (Radeon 780M vs. Radeon 660M). The Ryzen 7 260 is the clear choice from the benchmark evidence, with the Ryzen 5 7533HS only being preferable in scenarios where the 10-watt TDP difference is a binding constraint.