AMD Ryzen 7 8700F vs AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F and AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS are both 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 parts, but they target different segments: the 8700F is a desktop chip on AM5, while the 8845HS is a mobile chip on FP8. The benchmark data shows a clear pattern: the 8700F wins all 23 head-to-head comparisons, with the margin varying from a minor single-digit edge to a massive 112.6% blowout. This makes the choice straightforward for most users, but the 8845HS has its own redeeming qualities that matter in specific contexts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the database is the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where the 8700F scores 3761 against the 8845HS’s 1769. That is a 112.6% delta, meaning the desktop chip delivers more than double the single-thread performance in this particular workload. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows a similar gap, with the 8700F at 378 versus 276, a 37% advantage. These are not small differences; they indicate that the 8700F’s higher boost clock of 5.00 GHz, compared to the 8845HS’s 5.10 GHz, does not tell the whole story, as the desktop part clearly sustains much higher performance under this benchmark.

Multi-threaded results also heavily favor the 8700F. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 8700F scores 26646, while the 8845HS manages only 16192, a 64.6% delta. The 3DMark 8-thread test shows a 7.8% lead for the 8700F (6559 vs 6085), and the 3DMark 16-thread test shows a 6.5% lead (7883 vs 7404). Geekbench multi-core follows the trend: the 8700F scores 13523 versus 12212, a 10.7% advantage. These results suggest that while both chips have the same core and thread counts, the 8700F’s desktop power envelope and sustained boost behavior translate into substantial multi-threaded gains.

The PassMark suite is equally one-sided. The 8700F wins integer math by 2.7% (100371 vs 97747), floating-point math by 5.7% (62629 vs 59254), extended instructions by 11% (28474 vs 25642), and prime number finding by 12.6% (98 vs 87). Data compression shows a 9.8% lead (378160 vs 344439), while random string sorting is 9.6% ahead (45425 vs 41446). Physics simulation is another standout, with the 8700F at 1553 versus 1347, a 15.3% delta. The only tests where the 8700F’s lead is under 2% are 3DMark 2-thread (3.4%), 3DMark single-thread (1.8%), and PassMark integer math (2.7%). Even the weakest win is still a win, and the overall pattern is consistent: the 8700F is faster in every measured scenario.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F wins all 23 head-to-head benchmarks, and the 8845HS wins none. For a desktop builder who needs maximum compute throughput, the 8700F is the obvious pick. Its average benchmark score is 30746, placing it at the 82nd percentile of all CPUs, while the 8845HS sits at 29955 and the 81st percentile. The 8700F also has a launch MSRP of $270, which the database records as its initial price point. If you are building a stationary workstation or gaming rig, the 8700F’s performance advantage is decisive, especially in single-threaded and heavily multi-threaded workloads.

However, the 8845HS is not without merit. It is a mobile processor with a 45W TDP, whereas the 8700F runs at 65W. It also includes an integrated Radeon 780M GPU, while the 8700F has no integrated graphics at all. For a laptop or compact mobile system, the 8845HS is the only viable choice, as the 8700F requires a discrete GPU and a desktop AM5 motherboard. The 8845HS’s lower power draw and integrated graphics make it suitable for portable systems where performance per watt is more important than raw speed. If you need a chip for a thin-and-light laptop, the 8845HS wins by default, not because it benchmarks faster, but because the 8700F cannot physically fit in that use case.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Zen 4 architecture and use a 4 nm process at TSMC. They share the same transistor count of 25,000 million and the same die size of 178 mm². The cache layout is identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3. The codenames differ, with the 8700F being Phoenix and the 8845HS being Hawk Point, but the underlying core design is the same. The real architectural distinction is the market segment: the 8700F is a desktop part on AMD Socket AM5, while the 8845HS is a mobile part on AMD Socket FP8.

The 8845HS integrates a Radeon 780M GPU, which is a significant feature for mobile systems that lack a discrete graphics card. The 8700F has no integrated graphics, meaning it requires a dedicated GPU to output video. This is a crucial architectural difference for buyers: the 8845HS can run a laptop with just the iGPU, while the 8700F is strictly a CPU that needs a separate graphics solution. Both chips support DDR5 memory and use a dual-channel memory bus, but the 8845HS has a slightly higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s compared to the 8700F’s 83.2 GB/s. Neither supports ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical at 8 cores and 16 threads. The base clock differs: the 8700F runs at 4.10 GHz, while the 8845HS runs at 3.80 GHz. The boost clock is closer, with the 8700F at 5.00 GHz and the 8845HS at 5.10 GHz, giving the mobile chip a marginal 0.10 GHz advantage on paper. The TDP is a major difference: the 8700F is rated at 65W, while the 8845HS is rated at 45W. This explains why the desktop chip sustains higher performance in benchmarks despite the lower boost clock. The socket is another clear split: AM5 for the 8700F versus FP8 for the 8845HS.

The 8700F has an unlocked multiplier, meaning it supports overclocking, while the 8845HS is locked. The 8700F has a launch MSRP of $270, while the 8845HS has no recorded launch price. The release dates differ as well: the 8700F launched on 2024-03-31, while the 8845HS launched earlier on 2023-12-05. Both support PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The 8700F’s part number is 100-000001590, while the 8845HS has multiple part numbers (100-000001322, 100-000001384, 100-000001311) reflecting different FP7 and FP8 socket variants.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F wins all single-thread tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 3761 versus 1769 for the 8845HS, a 112.6% delta. In Geekbench single-core, it scores 2290 versus 2081, a 10% lead.

Q: Does the 8845HS have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the 8845HS includes a Radeon 780M integrated GPU. The 8700F has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for video output.

Q: Can the 8700F be overclocked?

A: Yes, the 8700F has an unlocked multiplier. The 8845HS has a locked multiplier, so it cannot be overclocked.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The 8700F has a 65W TDP, while the 8845HS has a 45W TDP. This lower power draw makes the 8845HS more suited for mobile systems.

Q: Which chip has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The 8845HS has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the 8700F has 83.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR5 memory.

Q: Are the core counts the same?

A: Yes, both have 8 cores and 16 threads, with identical cache configurations of 64 KB L1, 1 MB L2 per core, and 16 MB shared L3.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700F wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so the use-case split is not about performance but about platform and power. The 8700F is the winner for desktop builds where performance is the priority. Its 65W TDP and AM5 socket allow for sustained boost clocks that deliver a 64.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and a 10.7% lead in Geekbench multi-core. It is also the only one of the two with an unlocked multiplier, making it the choice for overclocking enthusiasts. The 8700F’s launch MSRP of $270 gives it a clear positioning as a desktop processor, and its 82nd percentile ranking versus the 8845HS’s 81st percentile reflects its higher average score of 30746.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS wins in portability and integration. Its 45W TDP is 20W lower than the 8700F’s, which is critical for laptops and compact mobile devices. The integrated Radeon 780M means it can operate without a discrete GPU, which is essential for thin-and-light systems. Its higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s is a small advantage in memory-bound tasks, though the benchmark data shows the 8700F still outperforms it in all recorded tests. The 8845HS is also the only option for FP8 socket motherboards, so if you are building a mobile system, it is the only choice. In short, the 8700F wins on raw performance and overclocking, while the 8845HS wins on power efficiency and integrated graphics.