AMD Ryzen 7 260 vs AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive overall performance advantage for the AMD Ryzen 7 260. Out of 15 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, the Ryzen 7 260 wins 14, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 takes a single, narrow victory. The scale of the Ryzen 7 260's wins is substantial in most workloads, though the one loss for the Ryzen AI 7 445 is noteworthy for single-threaded rendering.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 7 260 scores 17,211.5 against 10,590 for the Ryzen AI 7 445, a 62.5% advantage. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a similar pattern: 2,747.5 versus 1,723, a 59.5% gap. These results indicate that the 8-core, 16-thread configuration of the Ryzen 7 260 delivers far more parallel throughput than the 6-core, 12-thread Ryzen AI 7 445.

The single-core comparison is more nuanced. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen AI 7 445 actually wins, scoring 1,806 versus 1,770.5 for the Ryzen 7 260, a 2% margin. This is the only benchmark where the Ryzen AI 7 445 comes out ahead. However, in Cinebench R15 single-core, the Ryzen 7 260 reverses the trend with a score of 276.5 versus 254, an 8.9% lead. PassMark single-thread results also favor the Ryzen 7 260, with 3,736 versus 3,591, a 4% edge.

Beyond the Cinebench suite, the Ryzen 7 260 dominates in PassMark workloads. Data encryption shows the largest relative difference: 20,267 versus 10,519, a 92.7% improvement. Random string sorting also shows a massive gap, with 42,383 versus 23,488, an 80.4% lead. Extended instructions score 26,544 versus 15,826, a 67.7% difference. Integer math delivers 96,737 versus 58,332, a 65.8% gap. Data compression follows closely at 351,517 versus 215,812, a 62.9% advantage.

Floating-point math shows a 51.1% lead for the Ryzen 7 260, scoring 59,462 versus 39,362. Multithread performance is 55% higher, at 28,078 versus 18,115. Physics simulation scores 1,218 versus 976, a 24.8% gap. Prime number finding shows a 37.5% difference, with 77 versus 56.

The average benchmark score in the database places the Ryzen 7 260 at 43,717, which sits in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen AI 7 445 averages 26,936, placing it in the 79th percentile. The nearest rival for the Ryzen 7 260 is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 7745 with an average score of 43,704, a 0% delta, followed by the AMD Ryzen 7 170 at 43,689 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen AI 9 465 at 43,431 (0.7% delta), and the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43,326 (0.9% delta). For the Ryzen AI 7 445, the closest competitors include the Intel Core i7-1370P at 26,900 (0.1% delta), the AMD Ryzen 5 7545U at 26,849 (0.3% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 5700G at 27,051 (-0.4% delta), and the Intel Core i9-9900K at 27,097 (-0.6% delta).

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to two distinct usage profiles. The AMD Ryzen 7 260 is the stronger choice for multi-threaded workloads, content creation, encryption, compression, and any task that scales across cores. Its 62.5% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 92.7% lead in data encryption make it the clear pick for heavily parallel processing.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445, despite losing 14 of 15 comparisons, does show a single-core strength in Cinebench R23, where it beats the Ryzen 7 260 by 2%. This suggests that for workloads specifically optimized around that particular rendering engine, the newer Zen 5 architecture has an edge. However, the broader single-thread picture favors the Ryzen 7 260, which wins both Cinebench R15 single-core and PassMark single-thread.

The average benchmark score difference is substantial: 43,717 versus 26,936, a gap of roughly 16,781 points. The percentile rankings confirm this separation, with the Ryzen 7 260 at the 88th percentile and the Ryzen AI 7 445 at the 79th percentile. Users who prioritize raw compute throughput should select the Ryzen 7 260. Users who value the Zen 5 architecture, lower power envelope, and ECC memory support may consider the Ryzen AI 7 445, but the performance trade-off is significant.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher multi-core performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 260 wins all multi-core benchmarks. In Cinebench R23 multi-core it scores 17,211.5 versus 10,590 for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445, a 62.5% difference. PassMark multithread also favors the Ryzen 7 260 at 28,078 versus 18,115, a 55% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Ryzen AI 7 445 wins Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 1,806 versus 1,770.5 for the Ryzen 7 260, a 2% margin. This is the only head-to-head benchmark where it comes out ahead.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in data encryption?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 scores 20,267 in PassMark data encryption, compared to 10,519 for the Ryzen AI 7 445. This represents a 92.7% advantage, the largest relative gap in the head-to-head results.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each CPU?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 has an average benchmark score of 43,717 and ranks in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Ryzen AI 7 445 has an average score of 26,936 and ranks in the 79th percentile.

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The Ryzen AI 7 445 has 6 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 7 260 has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Ryzen AI 7 445 has a TDP of 28 watts.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The AMD Ryzen 7 260 uses 8 cores and 16 threads, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 uses 6 cores and 12 threads. Base clock speeds differ substantially: the Ryzen 7 260 runs at 3.80 GHz, whereas the Ryzen AI 7 445 runs at 2.00 GHz. Boost clocks also differ, with the Ryzen 7 260 reaching 5.10 GHz and the Ryzen AI 7 445 reaching 4.60 GHz.

Power consumption is another differentiator. The Ryzen 7 260 has a TDP of 45 watts, compared to 28 watts for the Ryzen AI 7 445. Both use the AMD Socket FP8, but the cache structures differ. The Ryzen 7 260 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen AI 7 445 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and only 4 MB of L3 cache.

Memory support varies as well. The Ryzen 7 260 supports DDR5, while the Ryzen AI 7 445 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. ECC memory support is present on the Ryzen AI 7 445 but not on the Ryzen 7 260. PCIe lane counts differ: the Ryzen 7 260 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen AI 7 445 provides Gen 4 with 14 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ between the two. The Ryzen 7 260 uses the Radeon 780M, while the Ryzen AI 7 445 uses the Radeon 840M. Transistor count and die size are recorded only for the Ryzen 7 260: 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Ryzen AI 7 445 does not have these figures in the database. Release dates also differ, with the Ryzen 7 260 released on 2025-01-05 and the Ryzen AI 7 445 on 2026-01-04.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is clear: the AMD Ryzen 7 260 is built on Zen 4 with the Hawk Point codename, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 uses Zen 5 with the Gorgon Point codename. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process node, but the generation labels differ. The Ryzen 7 260 belongs to the Ryzen 7 generation (Zen 4, Hawk Point), while the Ryzen AI 7 445 belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation (Zen 5 / Zen 5c).

The core count difference directly reflects the architecture design. The Ryzen 7 260 packs 8 full Zen 4 cores, whereas the Ryzen AI 7 445 uses 6 cores from the Zen 5 / Zen 5c combination. This explains the significant multi-thread performance gap despite the newer architecture on the Ryzen AI 7 445.

Cache hierarchy differences point to different design priorities. The Ryzen AI 7 445 offers a larger L1 cache per core at 80 KB versus 64 KB, which likely contributes to its Cinebench R23 single-core win. However, the L3 cache is dramatically smaller: 4 MB versus 16 MB shared. This 12 MB difference likely explains why the Ryzen 7 260 excels in data-heavy workloads like compression and encryption, where larger shared cache reduces memory traffic.

The integrated graphics solutions also differ by architecture generation. The Radeon 780M on the Ryzen 7 260 and the Radeon 840M on the Ryzen AI 7 445 represent different iGPU designs, though the database does not record comparative graphics benchmark scores. Both processors are active production parts for the mobile market segment, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Ryzen AI 7 445 adds ECC memory support, a feature absent from the Ryzen 7 260. It also supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5, which may enable different system memory configurations. The PCIe lane allocation favors the Ryzen 7 260 with 20 lanes versus 14 lanes, which could affect expandability in certain mobile platforms. The release date gap of roughly one year, with the Ryzen 7 260 launching first, places the Ryzen AI 7 445 as the newer design, but the benchmark data does not show an overall performance advantage for the newer part.