AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX vs AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX, which wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H takes just three wins. The most dramatic gap appears in the prime number test, where the 7645HX scores 178 versus 62 for the 6950H, a 187.1% advantage. That result is far outside the typical single-digit or low-double-digit deltas seen elsewhere.

Single-core performance is another clear separation point. The 7645HX leads by 33.1% in Geekbench single-core (2657 vs 1996) and by 12% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1809 vs 1615). The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows an 11.2% lead (289 vs 260). These are large margins for processors in the same mobile segment, and they indicate a substantial per-thread efficiency advantage for the newer Zen 4 design.

Multi-core results tell a more nuanced story. The 7645HX wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 3.6% (13985 vs 13501) and Cinebench R15 multi-core by 5.7% (2276 vs 2153), despite having only 6 cores and 12 threads against 8 cores and 16 threads for the 6950H. The Geekbench multi-core margin is much wider at 21.1% (11586 vs 9571). PassMark multi-thread shows an 11.4% lead (26476 vs 23770). The physics test favors the 7645HX by 34.3% (1497 vs 1115), a notable result given that physics workloads often scale with core count.

The Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H does have its own wins. In integer math it scores 87132 versus 77432, an 11.1% advantage. Data encryption goes to the 6950H by 4.1% (18673 vs 17900). Floating point math is essentially a tie: 48821 vs 48798, with a delta of 0%. These results suggest the 6950H retains some strengths in specific computational patterns, but they are isolated exceptions rather than a trend.

Where Each One Wins

The 7645HX is the clear choice for workloads that depend on per-core speed. Single-threaded applications, lightly threaded productivity tasks, and real-time responsiveness all benefit from the 33.1% Geekbench single-core lead and the 17.5% PassMark single-thread advantage (3907 vs 3326). The extended instructions test also favors the 7645HX by 13.1% (22969 vs 20302), which matters for code that uses advanced vector and cryptography extensions.

For mixed workloads, the 7645HX again dominates. Random string sorting shows an 11.6% lead (34434 vs 30859), data compression is 1.4% ahead (302256 vs 297936), and the multi-thread score is 11.4% higher. The physics test result, a 34.3% edge, points to strong scheduling and per-core efficiency in simulation-type tasks. Even though the 6950H has more cores, the 7645HX manages to beat it in most multi-threaded benchmarks because the per-core advantage is so large.

The 6950H is preferable only in narrow scenarios. Integer-heavy code, such as certain database operations or checksum workloads, will see the 11.1% advantage in PassMark integer math. Data encryption workloads favor it by 4.1%, which could matter for VPN servers or encrypted storage applications. The floating point result is a dead heat, so users should not expect a meaningful difference there. For everything else, the data indicates the 7645HX is the stronger part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations. The 7645HX uses the Zen 4 architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, while the 6950H uses Zen 3+ on a 6 nm TSMC process. The 7645HX belongs to the Dragon Range codename family within the 7000 series, and the 6950H is a Rembrandt part in the 6000 series. The manufacturing difference is reflected in the die size: the 7645HX measures 71 mm², while the 6950H is substantially larger at 208 mm². The 7645HX also lists 6,570 million transistors, which is notable given the smaller die area.

Cache organization differs significantly. Both parts have 64 KB of L1 per core, but the L2 cache is 1 MB per core on the 7645HX versus 512 KB per core on the 6950H. The shared L3 cache is 32 MB on the 7645HX and 16 MB on the 6950H. This doubling of both L2 and L3 capacity helps explain the single-core performance gap, since more cache reduces memory latency and improves instruction throughput.

Memory support is another differentiator. Both support DDR5 and dual-channel operation, but the 7645HX has a memory bandwidth rating of 83.2 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s for the 6950H. The 7645HX also supports ECC memory, while the 6950H does not. PCIe connectivity favors the 7645HX as well: it provides Gen 5 with 28 lanes, compared to Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the 6950H. The 7645HX uses AMD Socket FL1, and the 6950H uses AMD Socket FP7, so they are not socket-compatible.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The 7645HX includes a Radeon 610M, while the 6950H has a Radeon 680M. Clock speeds also favor the 7645HX: its base clock is 4.00 GHz with a boost of 5.00 GHz, versus 3.30 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost on the 6950H. Both parts have a 45 W TDP and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX is significantly faster. It leads by 33.1% in Geekbench single-core (2657 vs 1996), by 12% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1809 vs 1615), and by 17.5% in PassMark single-thread (3907 vs 3326).

Q: Does the Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H win any benchmarks despite having more cores?

A: Yes. It wins PassMark integer math by 11.1% (87132 vs 77432), PassMark data encryption by 4.1% (18673 vs 17900), and ties in PassMark floating point math (48821 vs 48798, delta 0%).

Q: How do the cache sizes compare?

A: The L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core. The L2 cache is 1 MB per core on the 7645HX versus 512 KB per core on the 6950H. The L3 cache is 32 MB shared on the 7645HX and 16 MB shared on the 6950H.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The 7645HX has a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, while the 6950H has 76.8 GB/s. Both use DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX supports ECC memory. The Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H does not list ECC support.

Q: What are the process node and socket differences?

A: The 7645HX is built on a 5 nm TSMC process and uses AMD Socket FL1. The 6950H is built on a 6 nm TSMC process and uses AMD Socket FP7. The 7645HX also has a smaller die size at 71 mm² versus 208 mm² for the 6950H.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX | AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 6950H |

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

| Cores | 6 | 8 |

| Threads | 12 | 16 |

| Base clock | 4.00 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 3+ |

| Codename | Dragon Range | Rembrandt |

| Process node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Die size | 71 mm² | 208 mm² |

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

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

| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon 610M | Radeon 680M |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Release date | 2023-01-03 | 2022-04-18 |

The release timing matters here. The 7645HX launched in January 2023, while the 6950H came out in April 2022. That gap of roughly nine months allowed AMD to bring the newer Zen 4 architecture to mobile, which explains why the 7645HX outperforms the 6950H in most tests despite having fewer cores and threads. The 6950H does hold a narrow edge in integer math and encryption, and its floating point result is identical, but those strengths do not compensate for the broad losses elsewhere.

The benchmark percentile data confirms the overall positioning. The 7645HX sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, and the 6950H is at the 83rd percentile. The average benchmark score for the 7645HX is 33668, versus 33201 for the 6950H. These are close aggregate figures, but the head-to-head breakdown shows the 7645HX winning by wide margins in the most common productivity and single-threaded tests. The 6950H is an older design that still performs respectably, but the data does not support choosing it over the 7645HX for general-purpose mobile workloads.