AMD Ryzen 7 260 vs AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 260 and AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 are both mobile processors built for the same AMD Socket FP8 platform, but they pursue very different performance targets. The database results show a clear split: the Ryzen 7 260 dominates multi-threaded workloads, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 takes a narrow lead in single-threaded tests. The recorded data from 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons shows the Ryzen 7 260 winning 12 tests, with the Ryzen AI 7 345 taking only 3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest advantage in the entire comparison belongs to the Ryzen 7 260 in PassMark data encryption, where it scores 20267 against 11814 for the Ryzen AI 7 345, a delta of 71.6%. This is the clearest signal that the Ryzen 7 260 is the stronger processor for security-related and encryption-heavy tasks. The same pattern appears in random string sorting, where the Ryzen 7 260 posts 42383 versus 25435, a 66.6% advantage, and in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it scores 2747.5 against 1712, a 60.5% lead.

The multi-core Cinebench R23 test confirms the trend. The Ryzen 7 260 scores 17211.5, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 manages 11461, giving the Ryzen 7 260 a 50.2% advantage. This is consistent with the core-count difference: the Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The PassMark integer math test shows a 52.4% gap (96737 versus 63475), and extended instructions show a 56.1% gap (26544 versus 17003). The Ryzen 7 260 also leads in floating point math by 39.5% (59462 versus 42621) and in the PassMark multi-thread score by 40.9% (28078 versus 19927).

The Ryzen 7 260 wins by smaller but still meaningful margins in other tests. Data compression shows a 48% advantage (351517 versus 237484), and find prime numbers shows a 24.2% edge (77 versus 62). The physics test is the closest of the Ryzen 7 260 wins, with a score of 1218 versus 1089, an 11.8% difference. Even in Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen 7 260 edges ahead with 276.5 versus 271, a 2% delta.

The Ryzen AI 7 345 has its own territory, and it is single-thread performance. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen AI 7 345 scores 1818 against 1770.5 for the Ryzen 7 260, a 2.6% advantage. The PassMark single-thread test shows a slightly larger lead: 3875 versus 3736, a 3.6% delta. The same 3.6% margin appears in the duplicate PassMark single-thread entry. These wins are small, but they are consistent across both single-core benchmarks, indicating that the Ryzen AI 7 345 has a genuine per-core efficiency advantage despite its lower core count and clock speeds.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for most workloads. The Ryzen 7 260 is the superior processor for any task that scales with cores and threads. Its 60.5% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 50.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core make it the obvious choice for rendering, compilation, and other parallel workloads. The encryption and compression results reinforce this: the Ryzen 7 260 is 71.6% faster at data encryption and 48% faster at data compression, which matters for database work, file archiving, and secure communications.

The Ryzen AI 7 345 is the better option only when single-thread performance is the sole consideration. Its 3.6% lead in PassMark single-thread and 2.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core suggest it handles lightly threaded applications with slightly more responsiveness. However, those margins are small, and the Ryzen 7 260 wins the Cinebench R15 single-core test by 2%, so the advantage is not universal. The Ryzen AI 7 345 also has a lower TDP of 28 watts versus 45 watts, which indicates it draws less power, but the benchmark scores do not include efficiency metrics, so any power-based recommendation must remain qualitative.

The overall database percentile ranking supports the Ryzen 7 260. It sits at the 88th percentile across all CPUs, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 sits at the 81st. The average benchmark score for the Ryzen 7 260 is 43717, compared to 29461 for the Ryzen AI 7 345. The nearest rivals for the Ryzen 7 260 include the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 at an average score of 43704 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 170 at 43689 (0.1% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43431 (0.7% delta). The Ryzen AI 7 345, by contrast, sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X at 29447 (0% delta) and the Intel Core i5-13500HX at 29270 (0.7% delta).

For a user prioritizing raw parallel throughput, the Ryzen 7 260 is the clear pick. For a user who values single-thread speed and lower power consumption above all else, the Ryzen AI 7 345 has a narrow edge, but the data does not show it winning any multi-threaded test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Ryzen 7 260 is based on Zen 4, uses the Hawk Point codename, and belongs to the Ryzen 7 generation. The Ryzen AI 7 345 uses the Krackan Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. Both are built on the same 4 nm TSMC process node, so the fabrication process is identical, but the core designs differ.

The cache hierarchy shows notable differences. The Ryzen 7 260 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core, with 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen AI 7 345 has a larger L1 cache at 80 KB per core and the same 1 MB of L2 per core, but its L3 cache is only 4 MB. This smaller L3 cache is a significant architectural difference, likely due to the hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c design, and it may explain why the Ryzen AI 7 345 falls behind in multi-threaded workloads that benefit from larger shared caches.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Ryzen 7 260 uses the Radeon 780M, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 uses the Radeon 840M. Both are integrated graphics solutions for mobile, but the database does not include graphics benchmark scores, so their relative performance cannot be quantified here. The memory support differs as well: the Ryzen 7 260 supports DDR5 only, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, so memory throughput is identical on paper.

The transistor count and die size are listed for the Ryzen 7 260 (25,000 million transistors and 178 mm²) but are not recorded for the Ryzen AI 7 345. This reflects a difference in available manufacturing data rather than an architectural feature. Both processors are unlocked for overclocking, and both lack ECC memory support.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are the most obvious specification gap. The Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 has 6 cores and 12 threads. Clock speeds also differ substantially. The Ryzen 7 260 has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Ryzen AI 7 345 has a much lower base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The lower base clock explains part of the Ryzen AI 7 345's multi-core deficit, though its boost clock is still 0.50 GHz lower than the Ryzen 7 260's.

Thermal design power is another clear differentiator. The Ryzen 7 260 is rated at 45 watts, while the Ryzen AI 7 345 is rated at 28 watts. This 17-watt gap indicates the Ryzen AI 7 345 is designed for more power-efficient systems, though the benchmark data does not include power consumption measurements for either processor.

The PCIe configurations differ. The Ryzen 7 260 supports Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen AI 7 345 supports Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only). This means the Ryzen 7 260 offers more PCIe lanes for expansion devices such as GPUs or NVMe storage. The socket is the same for both (AMD Socket FP8), as is the memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The production status is active for both, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. The release dates are close: the Ryzen 7 260 was released on January 5, 2025, and the Ryzen AI 7 345 on January 14, 2025.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 wins 12 of the 15 head-to-head benchmark tests, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 wins 3.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the comparison?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark data encryption, where the AMD Ryzen 7 260 scores 20267 versus 11814 for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345, a 71.6% difference.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 win any tests?

A: Yes, it wins Cinebench R23 single-core (1818 versus 1770.5, a 2.6% advantage) and the PassMark single-thread test (3875 versus 3736, a 3.6% advantage), which appears twice in the database.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 has a TDP of 45 watts, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 has a TDP of 28 watts.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 has 4 MB of L3 cache.