AMD Ryzen 7 5800H vs AMD Ryzen 7 8840U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the two processors. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840U wins 18 of the 23 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H takes 5. The 8840U dominates in single-thread and lightly threaded workloads, while the 5800H holds advantages in specific multi-threaded and memory-sensitive tasks.

The largest single-thread margin belongs to the 8840U. In 3dmark_single_thread, it scores 979 against the 5800H's 819, a 19.5% advantage. Geekbench_singlecore shows an 18% lead (1970 vs 1669), and Cinebench R23 single-core records a 20.3% delta (1703 vs 1416). PassMark single-thread results confirm the trend with a 17.3% advantage (3543 vs 3021). These are substantial gaps, indicating the newer Zen 4 architecture delivers significantly higher per-core performance.

The 8840U also wins in most multi-threaded tests, but the margins are smaller. Cinebench R23 multicore shows a 7.3% advantage (12972 vs 12091.5), Geekbench multicore records 16.8% (9610 vs 8230), and PassMark multithread scores 23346 vs 20789, a 12.3% gap. PassMark floating point math favors the 8840U by 9.8% (48820 vs 44479), and integer math by 6.1% (85740 vs 80786). The 8840U also wins PassMark physics by a wide margin: 1176 vs 830, a 41.7% delta.

The 5800H, however, holds victories in several notable tests. Its biggest wins come in 3dmark_16_threads (6143 vs 5691, a -7.4% delta for the 8840U) and 3dmark_max_threads (6127 vs 5677, -7.3%). It also wins 3dmark_8_threads (5105 vs 4896, -4.1%). These results suggest the 5800H scales better under heavy thread loads in the 3DMark suite, likely due to its higher TDP allowing sustained boost clocks. The 5800H also edges ahead in PassMark data compression (270608 vs 267525, -1.1%) and data encryption (16962 vs 16072, -5.2%). The 8840U counters with a 2.5% win in extended instructions (18654 vs 18203) and a 59.2% win in find prime numbers (78 vs 49).

The 2-thread and 4-thread 3DMark tests favor the 8840U decisively. In 3dmark_2_threads, it posts 1863 vs 1595, a 16.8% advantage. In 3dmark_4_threads, the margin is 7.7% (3289 vs 3053). These results align with the single-thread dominance, showing the 8840U's superior per-core throughput carries into low-thread-count scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840U belongs to the 8000 series and uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point. It is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800H is part of the 5000 series, uses Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne, and is built on a 7 nm process at the same foundry. It packs 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The process node difference is significant: the 8840U's 4 nm node allows for more transistors in a similar die area, directly contributing to its performance advantages.

Both processors have 8 cores and 16 threads, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache differs, however. The 8840U has 1 MB per core, while the 5800H has 512 KB per core. This doubles the L2 capacity per core on the newer chip, which helps explain its stronger single-thread and low-thread-count performance. The larger L2 cache reduces latency for frequently accessed data.

Memory support is another major distinction. The 8840U supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and a theoretical bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The 5800H uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 68.3 GB/s. The bandwidth difference is roughly 31%, which contributes to the 8840U's wins in memory-sensitive workloads like PassMark random string sorting (32158 vs 28144, a 14.3% advantage). Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The 8840U provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 5800H offers PCIe Gen 3. This affects peripheral bandwidth for storage and discrete GPUs. Both chips have integrated graphics, but they are not equal. The 8840U features the Radeon 780M, while the 5800H carries Radeon Vega 8. The 780M is a newer design on the Zen 4 platform, though no direct graphics benchmarks are recorded in this dataset.

The sockets differ as well. The 8840U uses AMD Socket FP8, with part numbers 100-000001323 (FP7r2), 100-000001375 (FP7), and 100-000001312 (FP8). The 5800H uses AMD Socket FP6 with part number 100-000000295. Both are mobile segments, and both are still in active production. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The 8840U has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 5800H runs at 3.20 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. The 8840U boosts 0.70 GHz higher, which is consistent with its single-thread benchmark wins. The TDP figures favor the 8840U on paper: 28 W versus 45 W for the 5800H. This means the newer chip achieves higher performance while consuming less power, though no efficiency metrics are recorded directly.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840U boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H reaches 4.40 GHz. The 8840U also has a slightly higher base clock at 3.30 GHz versus 3.20 GHz.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The 8840U uses the Radeon 780M, while the 5800H uses Radeon Vega 8. The database does not include direct graphics benchmarks, but the 780M is a newer design paired with the Zen 4 architecture.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The 8840U supports DDR5 and records 89.6 GB/s theoretical bandwidth. The 5800H supports DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s. This is a 21.3 GB/s difference in favor of the 8840U.

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the dataset?

A: The 8840U wins 18 of 23 head-to-head comparisons. The 5800H wins 5. The 8840U's wins are concentrated in single-thread, light-thread, and most multi-thread tests, while the 5800H wins in 3DMark high-thread-count tests and data compression/encryption.

Q: Are both processors based on the same core architecture?

A: No. The 8840U uses Zen 4 (Hawk Point), while the 5800H uses Zen 3 (Cezanne). The 8840U is built on a 4 nm process with 25,000 million transistors; the 5800H is on 7 nm with 10,700 million transistors.

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

A: Yes. Both have 8 cores and 16 threads. They also share 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. The L2 cache differs: 1 MB per core on the 8840U versus 512 KB per core on the 5800H.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several recorded specifications. The 8840U has a base clock of 3.30 GHz and boost clock of 5.10 GHz; the 5800H runs at 3.20 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost. TDP is 28 W for the 8840U and 45 W for the 5800H. The sockets are FP8 for the 8840U and FP6 for the 5800H. Architecture is Zen 4 for the 8840U and Zen 3 for the 5800H. Codename is Hawk Point versus Cezanne. Process node is 4 nm versus 7 nm. Transistor count is 25,000 million versus 10,700 million. Die size is 178 mm² versus 180 mm².

Cache configurations differ in L2 only: 1 MB per core on the 8840U versus 512 KB per core on the 5800H. L1 and L3 are identical. Memory support is DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s for the 8840U, while the 5800H uses DDR4 with 68.3 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 4 with 20 lanes on the 8840U versus Gen 3 on the 5800H. Integrated graphics are Radeon 780M versus Radeon Vega 8. The 8840U has three part numbers spanning FP7r2, FP7, and FP8; the 5800H has a single part number for FP6. Release dates differ: the 8840U launched on December 5, 2023, and the 5800H on January 11, 2021. Both are mobile segments, active in production, with no unlocked multipliers and no ECC support.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to the AMD Ryzen 7 8840U as the stronger performer overall. It wins 18 of 23 comparisons, including all single-thread tests and most multi-thread tests. Its single-thread lead is substantial, ranging from 16.2% in Cinebench R15 to 20.3% in Cinebench R23. The 8840U also carries a lower TDP (28 W vs 45 W), which suggests better efficiency, though the database does not include direct power measurements.

Users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness, such as web browsing, office work, or lightly threaded applications, should favor the 8840U. The data shows a 17.3% advantage in PassMark single-thread and a 19.5% lead in 3DMark single-thread. The chip also leads in PassMark physics by 41.7%, which can benefit certain simulation and physics-based workloads.

The 5800H remains competitive in specific multi-threaded scenarios. It wins 3dmark_16_threads by 7.4% and 3dmark_max_threads by 7.3%. It also leads in PassMark data compression and encryption. These results may reflect its higher TDP allowing sustained boost clocks under heavy loads. Users running sustained, highly parallel workloads that stress all 16 threads, and who are not constrained by power or thermals, might see better results from the 5800H in those narrow cases.

However, the 8840U is not far behind in most multi-thread tests despite its lower TDP. It wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 7.3% and Geekbench multicore by 16.8%. The 8840U also wins PassMark multithread by 12.3%. This suggests the 8840U achieves comparable or better multi-thread performance while consuming less power, which is a meaningful advantage for mobile platforms where thermals and battery life matter.

The architecture differences reinforce the benchmark results. The 8840U's Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm node, with doubled L2 cache per core and DDR5 support, provides the foundation for its superior per-core and memory performance. The 5800H's Zen 3 on 7 nm, with DDR4 and half the L2 cache, is a previous-generation design that still holds its own in certain high-thread-count workloads but trails in the majority of recorded tests.

For most users, the data supports choosing the 8840U. It wins the majority of benchmarks, offers a higher boost clock, lower TDP, newer memory support, and a more advanced process node. The 5800H is the better pick only in the narrow set of workloads where its 3DMark high-thread-count wins or data compression and encryption margins matter more than the 8840U's broad advantages. Given that the 8840U achieves its wins in both single-thread and most multi-thread tests while consuming less power, the database points to it as the more capable processor for general mobile computing.