AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS vs AMD Ryzen 7 3800X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data splits almost evenly, with the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X taking 9 wins and the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS taking 8. The most dramatic margin belongs to the 7640HS in single-thread performance, where it leads by 34.7% in PassMark single-thread (3654 vs 2712). The 3800X counters with a 35.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (19588 vs 12554) and a 38% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core (2765 vs 1715.5), though those R23 single-core results appear inconsistent with the PassMark single-thread outcome.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 7640HS wins by a razor-thin 0.2% (1978 vs 1974). That near-tie suggests the two processors are essentially equivalent in older multi-threaded workloads despite their different core counts. The 3800X takes Cinebench R15 single-core by 3.1% (278 vs 269.5), a modest edge.

Geekbench tells a different story entirely. The 7640HS leads by 10% in multi-core (10389 vs 9446) and by 25% in single-core (2093 vs 1675). Those are substantial margins, indicating the newer Zen 4 architecture delivers higher per-clock performance and better scaling in modern synthetic workloads.

PassMark splits across workload types. The 3800X wins data compression by 11.6% (304853 vs 269524), data encryption by 17.9% (19337 vs 15867), prime number finding by 25.2% (103 vs 77), multithread by 0.3% (23046 vs 22979), physics by 5.8% (1226 vs 1155), and random string sorting by 3.7% (32869 vs 31654). The 7640HS wins extended instructions by 2.6% (20556 vs 20037), floating point math by 13.7% (45220 vs 39759), and integer math by 8.2% (73284 vs 67725).

The pattern is clear: the 3800X dominates in memory-intensive and latency-sensitive tasks like compression, encryption, and prime finding. The 7640HS excels in arithmetic-heavy workloads, floating point math, and single-threaded throughput. The PassMark multithread score is nearly identical, with the 3800X ahead by just 0.3%, reinforcing that the 7640HS compensates for its two fewer cores with higher per-core efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is the choice for multi-threaded rendering and data manipulation. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 19588 against the 7640HS’s 12554 represents a 35.9% advantage, making it significantly stronger for CPU-bound rendering tasks. It also wins in data compression (304853 vs 269524), data encryption (19337 vs 15867), and prime number finding (103 vs 77), indicating better performance in workloads that stress memory bandwidth and integer throughput. The physics score of 1226 vs 1155 (5.8% lead) and random string sorting of 32869 vs 31654 (3.7% lead) further support its edge in simulation and sorting tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS wins in single-threaded and floating-point-heavy scenarios. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3654 vs 2712 (34.7% lead) is the largest single-test advantage in the entire comparison. Geekbench single-core also favors it by 25% (2093 vs 1675). Floating point math shows a 13.7% lead (45220 vs 39759), and integer math is 8.2% ahead (73284 vs 67725). Extended instructions are 2.6% better (20556 vs 20037). These results point to superior arithmetic throughput and per-core efficiency.

For general productivity, the Geekbench multi-core result of 10389 vs 9446 (10% lead) suggests the 7640HS handles modern multi-threaded office and creative applications better, despite having fewer cores. The 3800X’s PassMark multithread win is marginal at 0.3%, so neither chip dominates in raw thread count. The 7640HS also offers integrated graphics, while the 3800X has none, making the mobile chip self-sufficient for basic display output and light GPU tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS uses the Zen 4 architecture on TSMC’s 4 nm process, codenamed Phoenix. It packs 25,000 million transistors into a 178 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X uses Zen 2 on TSMC’s 7 nm process, codenamed Matisse, with 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The 7640HS is a mobile chip in the 7000 series, while the 3800X is a desktop chip in the 3000 series.

Core and thread counts differ: the 7640HS has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the 3800X has 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 4.30 GHz for the 7640HS and 3.90 GHz for the 3800X. Boost clocks are 5.00 GHz for the 7640HS and 4.50 GHz for the 3800X. The 7640HS has a 35 W TDP versus the 3800X’s 105 W TDP, which explains much of the performance-per-watt difference.

Cache layouts differ notably. The 7640HS has 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. The 3800X has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 32 MB shared L3. The 3800X’s larger L3 cache and extra cores help in memory-heavy tasks, while the 7640HS’s larger per-core L2 and faster clocks boost single-threaded and arithmetic workloads.

Memory support is a major split. The 7640HS uses DDR5 with dual-channel support and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory support. The 3800X uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and 51.2 GB/s bandwidth, with no ECC support. The 7640HS also has PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the 3800X has PCIe Gen 4 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The 7640HS includes a Radeon 760M integrated GPU; the 3800X has no integrated graphics. The 3800X is multiplier-unlocked and uses socket AM4, while the 7640HS is locked and uses socket FP8. The 3800X was released on 2019-07-06, while the 7640HS has no recorded release date in the database.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split by use case. The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is the stronger processor for multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, and any workload that benefits from its 8 cores and 32 MB L3 cache. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core lead of 35.9% is decisive, and its wins in data compression (11.6%), encryption (17.9%), and prime finding (25.2%) confirm its advantage in memory-latency-sensitive tasks. Users running CPU-heavy rendering, archival, or simulation workloads should favor the 3800X.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS is the better choice for single-threaded performance, floating-point math, and modern synthetic benchmarks. Its 34.7% PassMark single-thread lead and 25% Geekbench single-core lead are substantial. It also wins Geekbench multi-core by 10%, suggesting better scaling in modern applications that favor per-core efficiency over raw core count. Its integrated GPU and DDR5 support make it a self-contained mobile solution, though the 3800X’s 105 W TDP and desktop socket are incompatible with portable use.

The 3800X holds an 81st percentile ranking among all CPUs, as does the 7640HS, so both sit at the same overall performance tier. The average benchmark score for the 7640HS is 30390, while the 3800X scores 29447, a 3.2% gap in favor of the mobile chip. That difference is small, but it means the 7640HS edges ahead in overall average performance across the recorded tests. The 3800X’s nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 (0% delta), AMD EPYC 9654 (0.1% delta), Intel Core i5-13500HX (0.6% delta), and Intel Xeon Phi 7210 (0.7% delta). The 7640HS’s nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 7736U (0.1% delta), Intel Core i9-11980HK (-0.1% delta), Intel Core Ultra 5 225T (-0.3% delta), and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8640U (0.4% delta).

For a desktop user with a 105 W power budget and a need for heavy multi-threaded work, the 3800X is the data-backed pick. For a mobile user or someone prioritizing single-thread and arithmetic performance, the 7640HS wins. The 3800X’s launch MSRP was $399, which may factor into historical context, but the database records no launch MSRP for the 7640HS.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X boosts to 4.50 GHz.

Q: How much faster is the 7640HS in single-threaded PassMark?

A: The 7640HS scores 3654 vs 2712 for the 3800X, a 34.7% lead.

Q: Does the 3800X support ECC memory?

A: No, the 3800X has no ECC memory support, while the 7640HS supports ECC memory.

Q: What is the L3 cache difference?

A: The 7640HS has 16 MB shared L3, while the 3800X has 32 MB shared L3.

Q: Which chip has integrated graphics?

A: The 7640HS includes Radeon 760M integrated graphics; the 3800X has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the Cinebench R23 multi-core score difference?

A: The 3800X scores 19588 vs 12554 for the 7640HS, a 35.9% lead for the 3800X.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS | AMD Ryzen 7 3800X |

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

| Series | 7000 series | 3000 series |

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base clock | 4.30 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.50 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 105 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP8 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 2 |

| Codename | Phoenix | Matisse |

| Process node | 4 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 25,000 million | 3,800 million |

| Die size | 178 mm² | 74 mm² |

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

| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 32 MB |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 51.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 24 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 760M | None |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part number | 100-000000956(FP7r2)100-000000965(FP7)100-000001130(FP8) | 100-000000025 |