AMD Ryzen 7 8700G vs AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS and the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G share the same core architecture, but they are engineered for entirely different environments. The 8840HS is a mobile processor for thin-and-light laptops, while the 8700G is a desktop APU. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the 8700G winning every single recorded head-to-head test, but the context of that performance is crucial for a builder.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the database is the sheer consistency of the 8700G's victory across all 17 shared benchmarks. There is not a single test where the 8840HS manages to pull ahead. The margins, however, vary significantly depending on the workload type.

The largest deltas appear in multi-threaded and physics-based workloads. In Geekbench multicore, the 8700G scores 14584 against the 8840HS's 10104, a 30.7% advantage. PassMark's physics test shows a similar gap, with the 8700G at 1647 and the 8840HS at 1149, a 30.2% difference. This pattern indicates that the desktop part's higher sustained power envelope translates directly into superior throughput when all cores are active.

The Cinebench suite reinforces this trend. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the 8700G scores 17128 versus 13082 for the 8840HS, a 23.6% lead. The R15 multicore test shows a 24.1% gap (2693 versus 2045). These results suggest that for rendering or video encoding tasks, the 8700G will finish jobs noticeably faster.

The gap narrows considerably in single-threaded tests, though the 8700G still wins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the 8700G scores 1817 against 1737, a 4.4% advantage. PassMark single-thread shows 3928 versus 3626, a 7.7% lead. This is a logical outcome of the 8700G's higher base clock of 4.20 GHz compared to 3.30 GHz, even though both processors boost to the same 5.10 GHz ceiling.

Memory-sensitive and integer tasks also fall heavily in the 8700G's favor. PassMark data compression shows a 24.3% delta (386811 versus 292888). Data encryption shows a 22.7% gap (22842 versus 17650). Extended instructions testing reveals a 28.7% lead for the 8700G (29067 versus 20714). The smallest margin outside of single-thread tests is PassMark integer math, where the 8700G leads by 12.3% (103107 versus 90382).

FAQ

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

A: The largest single advantage for the AMD Ryzen 7 8700G is in Geekbench multicore, where it scores 14584 against the 8840HS's 10104, a 30.7% difference. PassMark physics is nearly identical, showing a 30.2% gap.

Q: Is the 8840HS competitive in single-threaded tasks?

A: It is closer, but it still loses. The 8700G leads by 4.4% in Cinebench R23 single-core and 7.7% in PassMark single-thread. The 8840HS's lower base clock appears to be the limiting factor, despite the shared 5.10 GHz boost clock.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 8840HS has an average benchmark score of 33667 and sits in the 84th percentile of all CPUs. The 8700G has a lower average score of 33089 and sits in the 83rd percentile. This is a case where the 8700G wins every shared test, but its overall average is pulled down by tests not shared between the two.

Q: Which processor is more directly comparable in average score to the 8840HS?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX has an average score of 33668, a 0% delta, making it effectively a statistical tie. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is also close with a score of 33537, a 0.4% delta.

Q: What is the efficiency difference?

A: The 8840HS is rated for a 28 W TDP, while the 8700G is rated for 65 W. This reflects the mobile versus desktop design intent, but the benchmark data shows the higher power budget of the 8700G yields a substantial performance return.

Q: Do they use the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both processors integrate a Radeon 780M GPU. The database does not list separate graphics benchmarks for these parts, so the performance difference here is limited to CPU-bound tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8700G is the clear winner in every scenario measured. For a desktop user, the data is unambiguous. Any workload that relies on multi-core performance, such as video rendering, 3D modeling, or software compilation, will be handled with significantly more speed. The 30.7% lead in Geekbench multicore and 23.6% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore are substantial enough to feel in real-world use. The 8700G also has the advantage of an unlocked multiplier, meaning the user can push it further with manual overclocking, a feature entirely absent on the 8840HS.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS has no benchmark wins to point to. Its value proposition is not about raw speed but about capability within a power constraint. The 28 W TDP makes it suitable for laptops where the 65 W TDP of the 8700G would be impossible to cool and power. It offers performance that, while lower, is still competitive. The 4.4% gap in single-core tests means that everyday desktop responsiveness, web browsing, and office applications will feel nearly identical on both platforms. The 8840HS makes sense only when the form factor demands a mobile processor.

Specification Differences

The two chips diverge on fundamental platform specifications. The 8840HS uses the AMD Socket FP8, while the 8700G uses AMD Socket AM5. This alone dictates their use cases: one is a soldered laptop chip, the other is a socketed desktop chip.

The 8700G has a significantly higher base clock at 4.20 GHz compared to 3.30 GHz, though both share a 5.10 GHz boost clock. The TDP reflects the platform reality, with the 8840HS at 28 W and the 8700G at 65 W. Memory bandwidth also differs, with the 8840HS rated at 89.6 GB/s and the 8700G at 83.2 GB/s. The 8840HS was released on December 5, 2023, while the 8700G followed on January 7, 2024. The 8700G has an unlocked multiplier, while the 8840HS does not. The launch MSRP for the 8700G is $329; no MSRP is listed for the 8840HS. The 8840HS lists multiple part numbers for different FP7 and FP8 sockets, while the 8700G has a single part number.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same fundamental architecture: Zen 4 on TSMC's 4 nm process node, with the same 25,000 million transistors and a 178 mm² die size. They are both 8-core, 16-thread parts. The cache layout is identical as well, with 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither supports ECC memory, and both use DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration.

The primary architectural difference is the codename and platform. The 8840HS is part of the Hawk Point family, designed for mobile. The 8700G is part of the Phoenix family, designed for desktop. This explains the TDP and socket differences. Both integrate the same Radeon 780M graphics, but the surrounding platform, memory controller tuning, and power delivery are optimized for their respective markets. The PCIe support is identical at Gen 4 with 20 lanes for the CPU.

The Verdict

The performance data presents a clear choice for a system builder. The AMD Ryzen 7 8700G is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. If the task is to build a desktop system and raw CPU performance is the priority, the 8700G is the only option between these two. Its wins range from 4.4% to 30.7% across the board, and the unlocked multiplier offers additional headroom for enthusiasts.

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is not a competitive alternative in the same sense; it is a different class of product. Its 28 W TDP and FP8 socket are indicators that it belongs in a laptop. The data shows it is slower, but it is also the only one of the two that can physically fit into a mobile chassis. The 8700G's 65 W TDP and AM5 socket render it a desktop-only part.

Choose the 8700G for any stationary build that demands maximum compute throughput. Choose the 8840HS only when the requirement is a mobile system and the performance compromise is acceptable. The 8840HS offers a closer single-thread performance profile, but the 8700G's multicore dominance is too significant to ignore for any sustained workload.