AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS vs AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS and AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS are two closely matched mobile processors from AMD's 4000 series, both built on the Zen 2 architecture. While they share the same core and thread counts, their benchmark results reveal a split decision, with each chip taking wins in different workloads. The data shows a fascinating near-tie, with the Ryzen 9 leading in Cinebench tests while the Ryzen 7 counters in Geekbench, making the choice between them less about raw performance and more about specific application preferences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark suite presents a clear split decision between these two processors, with each winning exactly two of the four tests. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Ryzen 9 4900HS delivers a decisive victory, scoring 1863 against the Ryzen 7 4800HS's 1700.5. This represents a 9.6% advantage for the Ryzen 9, a substantial margin that indicates a significant lead in heavily threaded rendering workloads. The single-core Cinebench R15 test also favors the Ryzen 9, with a score of 193 versus 186.5, a 3.5% edge that suggests slightly higher per-core performance in this specific benchmark.

However, the narrative flips entirely when examining Geekbench results. The Ryzen 7 4800HS takes the multicore crown with a score of 7019, surpassing the Ryzen 9's 6926 by 1.3%. This is a narrow but notable reversal, showing that the Ryzen 7 can outperform its higher-tier sibling in certain multi-threaded scenarios. The Geekbench single-core test follows a similar pattern, with the Ryzen 7 scoring 1320 against the Ryzen 9's 1311, a 0.7% difference. These Geekbench results suggest that the Ryzen 7's lower base clock of 2.90 GHz versus the Ryzen 9's 3.00 GHz does not translate into a deficit in this test suite, potentially due to more efficient boost behavior or other architectural nuances.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, both CPUs sit at the 49th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are squarely in the mid-range of desktop and mobile processors. The average benchmark scores are extraordinarily close: the Ryzen 9 averages 2573, while the Ryzen 7 averages 2557, a difference of only 0.6%. This proximity is reflected in their nearest rival listings, where each chip appears as a rival to the other with nearly identical delta percentages. The Ryzen 9's nearest rival, the Intel Xeon E5-4620 v3, scores 2587, placing the Ryzen 9 just 0.6% behind, while the Ryzen 7 sits 0.3% ahead of the Intel Xeon E5-4640 v3. In essence, the data shows two processors performing within a hair's breadth of each other, with the Ryzen 9's Cinebench dominance being its strongest differentiator.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins in Cinebench R15 multicore performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS wins decisively, scoring 1863 compared to the Ryzen 7 4800HS's 1700.5, a 9.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Ryzen 7 4800HS ever outperform the Ryzen 9 4900HS?

A: Yes, in Geekbench tests. The Ryzen 7 scores 7019 in multicore versus the Ryzen 9's 6926 (1.3% higher), and 1320 in single-core versus 1311 (0.7% higher).

Q: What are the core and thread counts for both processors?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS and AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS feature 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Is there a difference in the integrated graphics between the two chips?

A: Yes. The Ryzen 9 4900HS features Radeon Graphics with 512 shader processors (512SP), while the Ryzen 7 4800HS has Radeon Graphics with 448 shader processors (448SP).

Q: How do these CPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Ryzen 9 4900HS has an average benchmark score of 2573, while the Ryzen 7 4800HS averages 2557, making the Ryzen 9 0.6% higher on average.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ryzen 9 4900HS has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the Ryzen 7 4800HS boosts to 4.20 GHz.

Architecture Differences

Both the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS and AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS are built on the same fundamental architecture, sharing the Zen 2 microarchitecture and the Renoir codename. They are fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process node, with identical transistor counts of 9,800 million and the same die size of 156 mm². This architectural parity means that performance differences stem primarily from clock speeds and minor configuration changes rather than core design. Both CPUs have 8 cores and 16 threads, a cache hierarchy that includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

The integrated graphics present a notable architectural difference. The Ryzen 9 4900HS is equipped with Radeon Graphics featuring 512 shader processors (512SP), while the Ryzen 7 4800HS has a slightly less powerful Radeon Graphics unit with 448 shader processors (448SP). This disparity in shader count suggests the Ryzen 9's iGPU is better suited for graphics-intensive tasks, although neither chip's integrated graphics are meant to replace a dedicated GPU. Memory support also differs subtly: the Ryzen 9 lists DDR4 support, while the Ryzen 7 expands its compatibility to include both DDR4 and LPDDR4. Both processors operate on a dual-channel memory bus with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s, and neither supports ECC memory. They are both locked (multiplier unlocked: false), utilize PCIe Gen 3, and are designed for the mobile market segment, fitting into the AMD Socket FP6.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key differences between the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS and AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS, despite their shared foundational design. The most immediately apparent difference is in clock speeds: the Ryzen 9 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the Ryzen 7 operates at a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. This 100 MHz advantage for the Ryzen 9 in both base and boost clocks likely contributes to its Cinebench victories. The TDP also differs, with the Ryzen 9 rated at 35 watts and the Ryzen 7 rated at 45 watts, a counterintuitive spec that has the higher-tier chip consuming less power.

The integrated graphics differ as noted, with the Ryzen 9 featuring 512 shader processors (512SP) versus the Ryzen 7's 448 shader processors (448SP). Memory support also varies: the Ryzen 9 supports DDR4, while the Ryzen 7 supports both DDR4 and LPDDR4. The generation and series branding differ as well, with the Ryzen 9 labeled as "Ryzen 9 (Zen 2 (Renoir))" and the Ryzen 7 as "Ryzen 7 (Zen 2 (Renoir))". Release dates show the Ryzen 7 launched earlier, on 2020-01-05, while the Ryzen 9 followed on 2020-03-06. The part numbers also differ, with the Ryzen 9 using "100-000000099" and the Ryzen 7 using "100-000000098". Finally, the average benchmark scores differ, with the Ryzen 9 at 2573 and the Ryzen 7 at 2557, a 0.6% gap in the Ryzen 9's favor.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture that defies a simple "winner" designation, instead suggesting that the ideal choice depends heavily on the intended workload. For users prioritizing Cinebench-style rendering tasks, the AMD Ryzen 9 4900HS is the clear pick, offering a substantial 9.6% multicore and 3.5% single-core advantage in that benchmark. Its higher base and boost clocks (3.00/4.30 GHz versus 2.90/4.20 GHz) and larger integrated graphics unit (512SP vs 448SP) make it the more premium option on paper, despite its lower 35W TDP versus the Ryzen 7's 45W. The Ryzen 9's average benchmark score of 2573 also edges out the Ryzen 7's 2557.

However, the AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS is not without its own merits. It outperforms the Ryzen 9 in Geekbench multicore (7019 vs 6926) and single-core (1320 vs 1311), showing that it can be faster in certain applications. Its support for both DDR4 and LPDDR4 memory provides additional flexibility for system designers, and its earlier release date (2020-01-05 vs 2020-03-06) means it has been on the market longer. The benchmark results indicate that the Ryzen 7's lower clocks do not always translate to lower performance, potentially making it a more efficient choice in some scenarios. Ultimately, the data shows two evenly matched processors where the Ryzen 9's Cinebench dominance is offset by the Ryzen 7's Geekbench superiority, leaving the verdict to the specific demands of the user's applications.