AMD Ryzen 7 260 vs AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 260 and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 are both 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 processors, but the benchmark data reveals a decisive performance gap. The Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 wins 15 out of 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, making it the clear performance leader in every measured category. Despite this, the Ryzen 7 260 is not without merit, offering a lower TDP and a more modern process node, which positions it for different priorities.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking difference appears in multi-core rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 scores 27,877 compared to the Ryzen 7 260's 17,211.5, a massive 38.3% advantage. This is not a marginal lead; it represents a fundamental difference in sustained throughput capability. Similarly, in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the PRO 7745 scores 2,809 against 2,747.5, a smaller but still notable 2.2% edge.

Single-core performance tells an even more dramatic story. The Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 achieves 3,935 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Ryzen 7 260 manages only 1,770.5. This 55% delta is the largest single advantage in the entire comparison. The Cinebench R15 single-core test reinforces this, with the PRO 7745 scoring 396 versus 276.5, a 30.2% difference. These results indicate that the PRO 7745's higher boost clock of 5.30 GHz, compared to 5.10 GHz on the 260, translates into substantially better per-thread performance.

PassMark results follow the same pattern, though with varying margins. In integer math, the PRO 7745 scores 103,330 against 96,737, a 6.4% win. Floating-point math shows a 6.1% advantage, with scores of 63,332 and 59,462 respectively. The PRO 7745 also leads in data compression (386,829 vs 351,517, a 9.1% delta) and data encryption (22,821 vs 20,267, an 11.2% delta). The largest PassMark gap is in the find prime numbers test, where the PRO 7745 scores 166 compared to just 77 for the 260, a 53.6% difference that suggests a significant advantage in certain integer-heavy workloads.

Physics simulation results reflect the PRO 7745's dominance, with a score of 1,699 versus 1,218, a 28.3% delta. Multithreaded performance in PassMark also favors the PRO 7745, scoring 32,733 against 28,078, a 14.2% difference. Even in single-threaded PassMark tests, the PRO 7745 wins, scoring 3,849 versus 3,736, a 2.9% margin that is smaller but still consistent with the overall trend. Extended instructions testing shows a 9.1% advantage for the PRO 7745 (29,216 vs 26,544), and random string sorting favors it by 9.4% (46,759 vs 42,383).

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the Ryzen 7 260 at 43,717 and the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 at 43,704, a delta of 0%. This near-parity in the aggregate metric, however, masks the fact that the PRO 7745 wins every single individual comparison. Both processors sit at the 88th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are both well above average, but the PRO 7745's wins are consistent and often substantial.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 is the superior processor for raw performance in every benchmark recorded. If the goal is maximum computational throughput, whether for multi-core rendering, single-threaded applications, or general math workloads, the PRO 7745 is the clear choice. Its advantages range from a modest 2.2% in Cinebench R15 multi-core to a staggering 55% in Cinebench R23 single-core, and it wins every PassMark test by at least 2.9%.

The Ryzen 7 260, however, is not a failure. Its 45W TDP compared to the PRO 7745's 65W makes it a more power-efficient option, and its 4nm process node (versus 5nm) suggests a more modern manufacturing process. For users who prioritize energy consumption or thermal output over peak performance, the 260 is a viable alternative. The benchmark results indicate that the 260's performance is still respectable, landing in the 88th percentile, but it simply cannot match the PRO 7745's output.

The choice between these two processors comes down to a performance-versus-efficiency trade-off. The PRO 7745 is the undisputed performance winner, delivering higher scores across 15 different tests. The 260 offers a lower power envelope and a smaller die (178 mm² vs 71 mm² for the PRO 7745, though it has more transistors at 25,000 million vs 6,570 million), which may appeal in specific mobile or thermal-constrained scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 wins in every benchmark category where both were tested. This includes all Cinebench versions (R15 and R23, both multi-core and single-core) and all PassMark tests (data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime numbers, floating-point math, integer math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread). There is no benchmark in the data where the Ryzen 7 260 comes out ahead.

For the Ryzen 7 260, its "wins" are not in direct performance comparisons but in its specification advantages. It has a lower TDP of 45W versus 65W, which is a qualitative advantage for power-sensitive designs. It also uses a 4nm process node compared to the 5nm node of the PRO 7745, though this does not translate into a performance win in the data. The 260 also has a higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s, but this does not show up as a benchmark win.

In practical terms, the PRO 7745 is for users who need maximum compute performance with no compromises. The 260 is for users who need adequate performance with lower power draw, perhaps in a thin-and-light laptop or a system with limited cooling. The 260's integrated Radeon 780M graphics may also be a differentiator, though the PRO 7745 also has integrated Radeon Graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 wins all single-core tests. It scores 3,935 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 1,770.5 for the Ryzen 7 260, a 55% advantage, and 3,849 in PassMark single-thread versus 3,736, a 2.9% advantage.

Q: Is the Ryzen 7 260 more power-efficient?

A: Yes, based on the TDP figures. The Ryzen 7 260 has a TDP of 45W, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 has a TDP of 65W. This suggests the 260 is designed for lower power consumption, though no efficiency benchmarks are provided.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-core rendering?

A: The PRO 7745 is significantly faster. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 27,877 versus 17,211.5 for the 260, a 38.3% difference. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the PRO 7745 leads with 2,809 versus 2,747.5, a 2.2% margin.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory?

A: Both support DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus, but there are differences. The Ryzen 7 260 supports ECC memory, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 does not. Memory bandwidth also differs, with the 260 at 89.6 GB/s and the PRO 7745 at 83.2 GB/s.

Q: What is the overall performance ranking of these CPUs?

A: Both processors are at the 88th percentile among all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical: 43,717 for the Ryzen 7 260 and 43,704 for the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745, a 0% delta.

Q: Are these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the AMD Ryzen 7 260 and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 have a locked multiplier, as indicated by the "multiplierUnlocked" field being false.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same Zen 4 architecture but are built on different process nodes and codenames. The Ryzen 7 260 uses the Hawk Point codename and is fabricated on a 4nm TSMC process, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 uses the Raphael codename and is built on a 5nm TSMC process. This node difference does not translate into a performance advantage for the 260 in the benchmarks, but it does correlate with the lower TDP.

The transistor count and die size differ substantially. The Ryzen 7 260 has 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 has 6,570 million transistors on a 71 mm² die. This is a notable discrepancy, likely due to the 260's integrated Radeon 780M graphics, which is a more capable iGPU than the PRO 7745's Radeon Graphics.

Cache configurations also differ. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, but the L3 cache is double on the PRO 7745: 32 MB shared versus 16 MB shared on the 260. This larger L3 cache may contribute to the PRO 7745's performance wins, particularly in memory-sensitive workloads.

The socket and PCIe support are completely different. The Ryzen 7 260 uses AMD Socket FP8, which is a mobile socket, while the Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop socket. The PRO 7745 offers PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes, while the 260 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes. This makes the PRO 7745 more suitable for high-bandwidth expansion, while the 260 is clearly designed for mobile platforms.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical: both have 8 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are also the same at 3.80 GHz. The boost clock differs, with the PRO 7745 reaching 5.30 GHz compared to the 260's 5.10 GHz, which explains the single-core performance gap.

The TDP is a key differentiator, with the 260 at 45W and the PRO 7745 at 65W. This impacts cooling requirements and power budgets. The market segments also differ: the 260 is a Mobile processor, while the PRO 7745 is a Server/Workstation processor, even though it uses a desktop AM5 socket.

Memory support shows both use DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, but the 260 has a higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 83.2 GB/s for the PRO 7745. The 260 does not support ECC memory, while the PRO 7745 does. The integrated graphics differ, with the 260 featuring a Radeon 780M and the PRO 7745 featuring a generic Radeon Graphics. The release dates are also different, with the 260 launching on 2025-01-05 and the PRO 7745 launching on 2023-06-12.