AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS vs AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS and AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS are both 6-core, 12-thread mobile processors built on TSMC's 4 nm process, yet they belong to different generations (8000 series vs. 7000 series) and use different sockets (FP7 vs. FP8). Despite sharing identical core counts, clock speeds, and cache hierarchies, benchmark results reveal significant performance divergence, particularly in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the 8645HS leads by 57.3%. The data shows a processor that is largely superior in raw compute tasks, though the 7640HS manages to claim a few niche wins in specific workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS has an average benchmark score of 30,879, compared to 30,390 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS. This places the 8645HS in the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the 7640HS sits in the 81st percentile.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS scores 19,742 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Ryzen 5 7640HS scores 12,554. This represents a 57.3% advantage for the 8645HS, which is the largest delta between the two in any shared benchmark.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Ryzen 5 7640HS wins?

A: Yes, the 7640HS wins three of the 15 head-to-head benchmarks: PassMark data compression (269,524 vs. 265,826, a 1.4% lead), PassMark find prime numbers (77 vs. 73, a 5.2% lead), and PassMark integer math (73,284 vs. 72,740, a 0.7% lead).

Q: Do both processors have the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS and the Ryzen 5 7640HS feature the Radeon 760M integrated GPU. This is a point of parity between the two processors.

Q: What is the difference in TDP between the two processors?

A: The Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Ryzen 5 7640HS has a TDP of 35 watts. This 10-watt difference in thermal design power may contribute to the performance gap.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread score in PassMark?

A: The Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS scores 3,858 in PassMark single-thread, compared to 3,654 for the Ryzen 5 7640HS. This is a 5.6% advantage for the 8645HS.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on AMD's Zen 4 architecture, but they come from different product families: the 8645HS is part of the 8000 series with the codename "Hawk Point," while the 7640HS is from the 7000 series with the codename "Phoenix." This generational split is reflected in their sockets: the 8645HS uses AMD Socket FP7, whereas the 7640HS uses AMD Socket FP8. The 8645HS also has a higher TDP of 45 watts versus 35 watts for the 7640HS, which suggests the PRO model is designed to sustain higher power envelopes.

The process node is identical at 4 nm, with both chips manufactured by TSMC. They share the same transistor count of 25,000 million and a die size of 178 mm², indicating they are physically very similar silicon. Cache configurations are also identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. Memory support matches as well, with both supporting DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, and both support ECC memory.

The PCIe implementation is the same: Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. Both processors are unlocked, but neither has a free multiplier. The 8645HS has two part numbers (100-000001315 for FP7r2 and 100-000001388 for FP7), while the 7640HS has three (100-000000956 for FP7r2, 100-000000965 for FP7, and 100-000001130 for FP8). The 8645HS has a release date of April 15, 2024, while the 7640HS has no release date listed in the data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R23 results present a stark picture. In multi-core, the 8645HS scores 19,742 against the 7640HS's 12,554, a 57.3% advantage that dominates the comparison. The single-core R23 test shows an even larger percentage gap, with the 8645HS at 2,787 and the 7640HS at 1,715.5, a 62.5% difference. These are the two most lopsided results in the entire benchmark set. The R15 tests are much closer: the 8645HS wins multi-core 1,989 to 1,978 (0.6%) and single-core 280 to 269.5 (3.9%).

The PassMark suite reveals a more nuanced battlefield. The 8645HS wins nine of the twelve PassMark tests, but the margins vary considerably. The largest wins for the 8645HS include random string sorting (35,472 vs. 31,654, a 12.1% lead), data encryption (17,387 vs. 15,867, a 9.6% lead), and single-thread (3,858 vs. 3,654, a 5.6% lead). Smaller wins come in physics (1,208 vs. 1,155, a 4.6% lead), extended instructions (21,212 vs. 20,556, a 3.2% lead), multithread (23,569 vs. 22,979, a 2.6% lead), and floating point math (45,481 vs. 45,220, a 0.6% lead).

The 7640HS claims three wins, all in PassMark. Its largest is in find prime numbers, where it scores 77 versus 73, a 5.2% advantage. It also wins in data compression (269,524 vs. 265,826, a 1.4% lead) and integer math (73,284 vs. 72,740, a 0.7% lead). These wins are narrow, suggesting the 7640HS has a slight edge in specific integer-heavy or compression-oriented tasks, but the overall trend favors the 8645HS.

Specification Differences

The two processors share many specifications, but key differences exist. The most obvious is TDP: 45 watts for the 8645HS versus 35 watts for the 7640HS. The socket also differs, with the 8645HS using FP7 and the 7640HS using FP8. The series and codename differ as well: the 8645HS is from the 8000 series (Hawk Point), while the 7640HS is from the 7000 series (Phoenix). The release date is only listed for the 8645HS (April 15, 2024), with no date for the 7640HS.

Both have identical base clocks (4.30 GHz), boost clocks (5.00 GHz), core counts (6), thread counts (12), and cache hierarchies. The process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, memory support, memory bus, memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe version and lane count, integrated graphics, market segment, production status, and multiplier lock status are all the same. Neither has a launch MSRP listed in the data. The part numbers differ, with the 8645HS having two variants and the 7640HS having three, reflecting different socket compatibility options.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS wins in the vast majority of scenarios. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19,742 is a standout, indicating a major advantage in heavily threaded workloads such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or software compilation. The 62.5% lead in R23 single-core also suggests superiority in lightly threaded applications like legacy software or certain productivity tools. The 8645HS also wins in memory-intensive tasks like random string sorting (12.1% lead) and data encryption (9.6% lead), making it the better choice for security-related workloads or database operations that involve heavy sorting. The multithread score of 23,569 versus 22,979 further confirms its edge in general parallel processing.

The Ryzen 5 7640HS wins in three specific PassMark tests: data compression, find prime numbers, and integer math. The data compression win (269,524 vs. 265,826) is the most substantial, suggesting an advantage in file archiving or compression tasks. The find prime numbers result (77 vs. 73) points to a slight edge in pure integer calculation loops, while the integer math win (73,284 vs. 72,740) reinforces this pattern. These wins are narrow, so the 7640HS is not categorically better in these areas, but it does hold a measurable edge in these specific benchmarks.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8645HS is the stronger processor. It wins 12 of the 15 head-to-head benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests, and has a higher average benchmark score (30,879 vs. 30,390). The 57.3% advantage in Cinebench R23 multi-core is decisive, and the 5.6% lead in PassMark single-thread shows it is also better in lighter tasks. The higher 45-watt TDP likely enables this performance, making the 8645HS the choice for users who prioritize raw compute power over power efficiency. Its 82nd percentile ranking versus the 7640HS's 81st percentile further confirms its overall superiority.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS is not without merit. Its 35-watt TDP could make it more suitable for thinner laptops where thermal headroom is limited. The three benchmark wins it does have—data compression, find prime numbers, and integer math—are all in the PassMark suite, but they are narrow victories. For a user whose primary tasks involve data compression, the 7640HS might offer a marginal edge, but this is a niche scenario. The 7640HS also has a broader list of part numbers, including an FP8 variant, which might offer more motherboard compatibility options. However, given the overwhelming performance lead of the 8645HS in both multi-core and single-core tests, the data clearly favors the 8000-series PRO model for any performance-sensitive workload.