AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS vs AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS and AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS are two mobile processors that appear nearly identical on paper, yet benchmark results reveal a subtle but consistent split in their strengths. Both CPUs achieve an identical average benchmark score of 29955 and hold the same 81st percentile ranking among all CPUs, but the distribution of their wins tells a more nuanced story. The 8845HS takes 12 of the 23 head-to-head comparisons, while the 7840HS counters with 11 wins, making this a remarkably close contest that hinges on specific workload types.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture of two distinct performance profiles. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS dominates in synthetic multi-threaded rendering and general compute tests, showing its strength in sustained, heavily threaded workloads. Its most decisive victory comes in Cinebench R15 multicore, where it scores 2575 against the 7840HS's 2222.84, a substantial 13.7% advantage. Similarly, in Cinebench R23 multicore, the 8845HS leads with 16192 versus 15102, a 6.7% margin. The 8845HS also wins in Geekbench multicore (12212 vs 11846, 3% ahead) and across the 3DMark suite, taking victories in the 16-thread, 2-thread, 4-thread, max-thread, and single-thread tests.

Conversely, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS carves out its wins in PassMark's specialized computational tasks, particularly those involving mathematical and encryption workloads. It wins the PassMark floating point math test with 59921 versus 59254 (1.1% ahead), integer math with 98682 versus 97747 (1% ahead), and data encryption with 20627 versus 20416 (1% ahead). The 7840HS also edges ahead in PassMark physics (1376 vs 1347, 2.2% ahead), multithread (28633 vs 28498, 0.5% ahead), and single-thread (3753 vs 3738, 0.4% ahead). Interestingly, the 7840HS wins the 3DMark 8-thread test with 6092 against 6085, a narrow 0.1% margin that breaks the 8845HS's sweep of that suite.

The practical implication is that the 8845HS is better suited for rendering, video encoding, and general productivity where Cinebench and Geekbench scores correlate with real-world performance. The 7840HS, meanwhile, shows a slight edge in scientific computing, cryptography, and number-crunching tasks that stress specific execution units.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: Both processors have an identical average benchmark score of 29955, with a deltaPct of 0 between them.

Q: Is the 8845HS always faster than the 7840HS?

A: No. While the 8845HS wins 12 of 23 comparisons, the 7840HS wins 11, including all PassMark math and encryption tests. The 8845HS wins all Cinebench and Geekbench tests.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta is in Cinebench R15 multicore, where the 8845HS leads by 13.7%, scoring 2575 versus 2222.84 for the 7840HS.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory and expansion features?

A: Yes, both support DDR5 memory with dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth, and both feature PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

Q: Are there any differences in integrated graphics?

A: No, both processors feature the identical Radeon 780M integrated graphics solution.

Q: Which CPU has a higher TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS has a TDP of 45, while the AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS has a TDP of 35.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking divergence between these two chips appears in multi-threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 8845HS achieves 2575, which is a full 13.7% ahead of the 7840HS's 2222.84. This is by far the largest single-test margin in the entire comparison. The gap narrows considerably in Cinebench R23 multicore, where the 8845HS scores 16192 versus 15102, a 6.7% advantage that still represents a meaningful performance lead for sustained rendering tasks. Geekbench multicore shows a similar trend, with the 8845HS at 12212 and the 7840HS at 11846, a 3% difference.

The 3DMark results are consistently in favor of the 8845HS, though by smaller margins. In the 16-thread test, the 8845HS scores 7404 versus 7314 (1.2% ahead), and in the max-thread test it scores 7413 versus 7316 (1.3% ahead). The single-thread 3DMark test shows 990 versus 979 (1.1% ahead), and the 2-thread test shows 1924 versus 1904 (1% ahead). The 4-thread test follows the pattern with 3690 versus 3651 (1.1% ahead). The lone exception is the 8-thread test, where the 7840HS takes a narrow 0.1% victory with 6092 against 6085.

The PassMark suite tells the opposite story. The 7840HS wins the physics test with 1376 versus 1347, a 2.2% margin that is its largest win of the entire comparison. It also takes floating point math (59921 vs 59254, 1.1% ahead), integer math (98682 vs 97747, 1% ahead), data encryption (20627 vs 20416, 1% ahead), and data compression (345536 vs 344439, 0.3% ahead). The 7840HS also wins PassMark multithread (28633 vs 28498, 0.5% ahead) and single-thread (3753 vs 3738, 0.4% ahead). The 8845HS manages only one PassMark win, in random string sorting, where it scores 41446 versus 40364, a 2.6% margin.

Single-core performance is remarkably close across all tests. The 8845HS leads in Cinebench R15 single-core (276 vs 274, 0.7% ahead), Cinebench R23 single-core (1769 vs 1761, 0.5% ahead), Geekbench single-core (2081 vs 2031, 2.4% ahead), and 3DMark single-thread (990 vs 979, 1.1% ahead). However, the 7840HS counters with a 0.4% lead in PassMark single-thread (3753 vs 3738).

Specification Differences

The core specifications of these two processors are nearly identical, with only a handful of differences. Both feature 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The most significant specification difference is TDP: the 7840HS has a 35 TDP, while the 8845HS has a 45 TDP. This higher power envelope likely explains the 8845HS's advantage in sustained multi-threaded workloads.

The processors differ in their series designation, with the 7840HS belonging to the 7000 series and the 8845HS to the 8000 series. Their codenames also differ: the 7840HS is codenamed Phoenix, while the 8845HS is codenamed Hawk Point. The 8845HS has a release date of 2023-12-05, while the 7840HS has no release date listed. ECC memory support differs as well, with the 7840HS supporting ECC memory and the 8845HS not supporting it. The part numbers also differ, with the 7840HS using 100-000000955(FP7r2), 100-000000964(FP7), and 100-000001129(FP8), while the 8845HS uses 100-000001322(FP7r2), 100-000001384(FP7), and 100-000001311(FP8).

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture, built on the Zen 4 core design and manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process node. They both feature 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, with identical cache configurations: 64 KB L1 per core, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3. They use the same AMD Socket FP8 and support identical PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

The architectural distinction lies in their codenames and generations. The 7840HS uses the Phoenix codename from the Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 (Phoenix)) generation, while the 8845HS uses the Hawk Point codename from the Ryzen 7 (Zen 4 (Hawk Point)) generation. Despite this naming difference, the underlying Zen 4 architecture, process node, transistor count, and die size are identical. Both feature the Radeon 780M integrated graphics and support dual-channel DDR5 memory with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

The only functional architectural difference is ECC memory support, where the 7840HS includes it and the 8845HS does not. The TDP difference of 35 versus 45 suggests the 8845HS may have a more aggressive power delivery design, but the core architecture itself appears unchanged between the two generations.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is the stronger choice for users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering and general compute performance. Its 13.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multicore and 6.7% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore are substantial advantages for video editing, 3D rendering, and compilation workloads. The 3% lead in Geekbench multicore further reinforces this position for everyday productivity tasks. The higher 45 TDP likely enables sustained performance in these demanding scenarios.

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840HS, however, is not simply an inferior product. It wins the PassMark physics test by 2.2%, floating point math by 1.1%, and integer math by 1%, making it slightly better suited for scientific simulations, financial modeling, and encryption-heavy workloads. Its ECC memory support could be a deciding factor for users who require error-correcting memory for data integrity in professional environments. The lower 35 TDP also suggests it may be more efficient in thermally constrained chassis.

For most users, the 8845HS is the safer recommendation given its broader wins across Cinebench, Geekbench, and 3DMark. The 7840HS becomes compelling only when specific PassMark workloads or ECC memory support are priorities. With identical average scores of 29955 and identical 81st percentile rankings, the real-world difference between these two processors is likely to be modest in most applications. The choice ultimately comes down to whether rendering performance or specialized computational tasks matter more.