AMD Ryzen 7 3700X vs AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X and AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS split their benchmark wins by workload type, with the 3700X taking 5 wins and the 8840HS taking 10. The 8840HS dominates in raw computational throughput and single-threaded tasks, while the 3700X holds advantages in specific legacy or integer-heavy workloads.

The 8840HS wins decisively in single-core performance, floating-point math, integer math, and general multi-threaded workloads. Its single-thread score of 3626 in PassMark is 26.8% higher than the 3700X's 2656, and its Geekbench single-core score of 1899 beats the 3700X's 1593 by 16.1%. This makes the 8840HS the clear choice for everyday responsiveness, lightly threaded applications, and productivity software that relies heavily on single-core speed.

In multi-threaded scenarios, the 8840HS also leads. Its Geekbench multi-core score of 10104 is 11.9% ahead of the 3700X's 8899, and its PassMark multi-thread score of 24990 is 10.1% higher than 22458. The 8840HS also wins in PassMark floating-point math by 25.8% (52582 vs 39005) and integer math by 26.5% (90382 vs 66399), indicating strong performance in scientific computing, financial modeling, and code compilation.

The 3700X, however, wins in several specific workloads. It leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core by a narrow 2.3% (2092 vs 2045), in PassMark data compression by 1.2% (296379 vs 292888), and in data encryption by 7.1% (18900 vs 17650). Its biggest win comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 99 versus 79, a 25.3% advantage. It also edges out the 8840HS in PassMark physics by 2.8% (1181 vs 1149).

The 8840HS wins in extended instructions by 7.1% (20714 vs 19241) and random string sorting by 9.5% (35517 vs 32131), showing strength in string manipulation and modern instruction set workloads.

The data shows a clear split: the 8840HS is the better all-around performer, especially in tasks that benefit from newer architecture and higher clock speeds. The 3700X retains wins in encryption, compression, prime number calculation, and physics, making it surprisingly competitive in those niche areas despite being older.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and target different market segments, which explains their performance profiles. The 3700X is a desktop part from the 3000 series, built on the Zen 2 architecture with the codename Matisse. It uses a 7 nm process node fabricated by TSMC and contains 3,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The 8840HS, by contrast, is a mobile processor from the 8000 series, built on the newer Zen 4 architecture with the codename Hawk Point. It uses a 4 nm process node, also by TSMC, and packs 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die.

The transistor count difference is substantial, with the 8840HS featuring over 6.5 times more transistors than the 3700X. This allows the 8840HS to integrate more complex logic, including a Radeon 780M integrated GPU, which the 3700X lacks entirely. The 3700X has no integrated graphics and requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads, so core count is identical. However, the cache hierarchy differs significantly. The 3700X has 512 KB of L2 cache per core and a 32 MB shared L3 cache. The 8840HS has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, double that of the 3700X, but only 16 MB of L3 cache, half the capacity. Both share the same 64 KB L1 cache per core.

Memory support also diverges. The 3700X supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The 8840HS supports DDR5 memory, also dual-channel, but with a much higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. This nearly 75% increase in memory bandwidth contributes to the 8840HS's advantage in memory-intensive workloads.

The socket and platform differ completely. The 3700X uses AMD Socket AM4, a desktop platform, while the 8840HS uses AMD Socket FP8, a mobile platform. The 3700X has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the 8840HS is locked. The 3700X also has more PCIe lanes, 24 versus 20, though both support PCIe Gen 4.

Power consumption is a key differentiator. The 3700X has a TDP of 65 watts, while the 8840HS has a TDP of just 28 watts. Despite the lower power envelope, the 8840HS achieves higher performance in most benchmarks, a signal of the efficiency improvements of the newer Zen 4 architecture and smaller process node.

Clock speeds also favor the 8840HS. Its base clock is 3.30 GHz and boost clock is 5.10 GHz, versus the 3700X's 3.60 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. The 8840HS boosts 0.70 GHz higher, explaining its significant single-thread lead, while the 3700X has a slightly higher base clock, which helps in sustained all-core workloads.

The release dates show a gap of over four years, with the 3700X launching on July 6, 2019, and the 8840HS on December 5, 2023. Production status for both is listed as active, meaning both remain current products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison reveals several decisive margins. The largest single-thread win for the 8840HS appears in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 3626 against 2656, a 26.8% advantage. This same margin appears in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread, confirming consistency. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 24.4% lead for the 8840HS (270 vs 204), and Geekbench single-core shows a 16.1% lead (1899 vs 1593).

In multi-threaded tests, the 8840HS leads Geekbench multi-core by 11.9% (10104 vs 8899) and PassMark multi-thread by 10.1% (24990 vs 22458). However, Cinebench R15 multi-core tells a different story, with the 3700X winning by 2.3% (2092 vs 2045). This suggests that the 3700X's higher base clock and larger L3 cache help in certain sustained multi-core workloads, even though the 8840HS wins in most other multi-thread tests.

The 8840HS dominates in arithmetic and math workloads. PassMark floating-point math shows a 25.8% lead (52582 vs 39005), and PassMark integer math shows a 26.5% lead (90382 vs 66399). These are among the largest margins in the entire comparison, indicating that the newer architecture handles complex mathematical operations much more efficiently.

The 3700X's wins are concentrated in a few specific areas. Its largest win is in PassMark find prime numbers, with a score of 99 versus 79, a 25.3% advantage. This test likely benefits from the 3700X's larger L3 cache and older integer pipeline characteristics. It also wins in data encryption by 7.1% (18900 vs 17650), data compression by 1.2% (296379 vs 292888), and physics by 2.8% (1181 vs 1149).

The 8840HS wins in PassMark extended instructions by 7.1% (20714 vs 19241) and random string sorting by 9.5% (35517 vs 32131). These wins demonstrate that the newer processor handles modern instruction extensions and memory-intensive string operations more effectively.

Overall, the benchmark data shows the 8840HS winning 10 of 15 direct comparisons, with an average benchmark score of 33667 versus the 3700X's 34260. Interestingly, the 3700X has a higher average score, driven by its strong showings in PassMark data compression and encryption, but the 8840HS wins in more individual tests. Both processors sit at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, indicating similar overall performance tiers.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification areas. The 3700X has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.40 GHz, while the 8840HS has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 8840HS boosts 0.70 GHz higher, but the 3700X has a 0.30 GHz higher base clock.

Power consumption differs substantially, with the 3700X rated at 65 watts TDP versus the 8840HS at 28 watts TDP. The 8840HS consumes less than half the power while delivering higher performance in most tests.

The 3700X uses AMD Socket AM4, while the 8840HS uses AMD Socket FP8. This reflects their different market segments: desktop versus mobile. The 3700X has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking, while the 8840HS has a locked multiplier.

Process technology differs, with the 3700X on 7 nm and the 8840HS on 4 nm, both from TSMC. Transistor count is 3,800 million for the 3700X and 25,000 million for the 8840HS, with die sizes of 74 mm² and 178 mm² respectively.

Cache configuration differs in L2 and L3. The 3700X has 512 KB L2 per core and 32 MB L3, while the 8840HS has 1 MB L2 per core and 16 MB L3. L1 cache is identical at 64 KB per core.

Memory support differs, with the 3700X using DDR4 and the 8840HS using DDR5. Both are dual-channel, but memory bandwidth is 51.2 GB/s for the 3700X and 89.6 GB/s for the 8840HS.

PCIe lane count differs, with the 3700X offering 24 lanes and the 8840HS offering 20 lanes, both PCIe Gen 4. The 3700X has no integrated graphics, while the 8840HS includes Radeon 780M graphics.

The 3700X has a launch MSRP of $329, while the 8840HS has no recorded launch MSRP. The 3700X was released on July 6, 2019, and the 8840HS on December 5, 2023. Both are listed as active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS wins all single-thread benchmarks. It scores 3626 in PassMark single-thread versus 2656 for the 3700X, a 26.8% advantage. It also leads in Cinebench R15 single-core by 24.4% and Geekbench single-core by 16.1%.

Q: How do they compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The 8840HS leads in most multi-threaded tests, winning Geekbench multi-core by 11.9% and PassMark multi-thread by 10.1%. However, the 3700X wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 2.3% (2092 vs 2045).

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The 8840HS has a TDP of 28 watts, while the 3700X has a TDP of 65 watts. Despite the lower power draw, the 8840HS achieves higher performance in the majority of benchmarks, indicating significantly better efficiency.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 8 cores and 16 threads. However, they use different architectures, with the 3700X using Zen 2 (Matisse) and the 8840HS using Zen 4 (Hawk Point).

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The 3700X has 32 MB of L3 cache, double the 16 MB of the 8840HS. The 8840HS compensates with twice the L2 cache per core (1 MB versus 512 KB).

Q: What are the biggest individual benchmark wins for each processor?

A: The 8840HS has its largest win in PassMark floating-point math, leading by 25.8% (52582 vs 39005). The 3700X has its largest win in PassMark find prime numbers, leading by 25.3% (99 vs 79).

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS for most users. It wins 10 of 15 head-to-head benchmarks, including all single-thread tests and the majority of multi-threaded workloads. Its 26.8% lead in single-thread PassMark and 26.5% lead in integer math make it the superior choice for general computing, productivity, and computational tasks. The 8840HS also achieves this while consuming only 28 watts TDP, making it exceptionally efficient for a mobile processor.

The AMD Ryzen 7 3700X remains relevant in specific scenarios. Its wins in data encryption (7.1% lead), data compression (1.2% lead), find prime numbers (25.3% lead), and physics (2.8% lead) suggest strengths in certain encryption, compression, and legacy integer workloads. Its higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and larger 32 MB L3 cache contribute to these niche advantages. The 3700X also has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking and more PCIe lanes (24 versus 20), making it a flexible desktop platform choice.

For users prioritizing raw performance across a broad range of tasks, the 8840HS is the clear winner. Its newer Zen 4 architecture, higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz, and doubled L2 cache deliver measurable gains in most benchmarks. The integrated Radeon 780M graphics also make it a self-contained solution for mobile systems.

For users who need desktop-specific features like overclocking, more PCIe lanes, or who work heavily with encryption and compression, the 3700X offers advantages that the 8840HS cannot match. Its 2.3% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 7.1% win in data encryption show it can still hold its own in certain professional workloads.

Both processors sit at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy similar overall performance tiers. The average benchmark score of 34260 for the 3700X is actually slightly higher than the 8840HS's 33667, driven by the 3700X's strong compression and encryption scores. This means the choice depends heavily on workload mix rather than overall performance.

The verdict is straightforward: the 8840HS is the better all-around processor, particularly for mobile users and those needing high single-thread and math performance. The 3700X is a solid desktop option for users who prioritize encryption, compression, physics, and overclocking flexibility. The data shows that while the 8840HS wins more tests, the 3700X still has meaningful strengths that make it a viable choice in the right context.