AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX vs AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along workload lines. The AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX is a mobile processor with a full suite of recorded PassMark results, while the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its performance profile cannot be quantified from direct measurements.

For the 8745HX, the strongest absolute scores come from data compression and integer math. The PassMark data compression score of 363,759 leads all recorded tests, followed by integer math at 100,328 and floating point math at 61,972. These results indicate the chip handles heavily parallel integer workloads with substantial throughput. Single-thread performance sits at 3,879, which positions it well for lightly threaded tasks relative to its own multi-thread output.

The Embedded 9950X3D, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and no individual test scores. Its percentile ranking of 50 places it at the median of all CPUs in the database, but this is a default ranking with no supporting measurements. For practical comparisons, the 8745HX is the only unit with usable performance data, and its 92nd percentile ranking reflects that.

The absence of benchmark data for the Embedded 9950X3D means any use-case split must rely on architectural specifications rather than measured results. The 9950X3D targets embedded desktop applications with 16 cores and 32 threads, while the 8745HX targets mobile systems with 8 cores and 16 threads. The core count difference alone suggests the embedded part is designed for throughput-oriented server or workstation roles, while the mobile part balances performance with power constraints.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations and process nodes. The 8745HX uses Zen 4 architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with a codename of Dragon Range and belongs to the 8000 series. Its die size is 71 mm² with 6,570 million transistors. The Embedded 9950X3D uses Zen 5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with a codename of Granite Ridge and belongs to the 9000 series. Its die is composed of two 70.6 mm² chiplets, totaling 16,630 million transistors.

Cache structures differ significantly. The 8745HX has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 32 MB of shared L3 cache. The 9950X3D has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3 cache. The L3 difference is substantial: 128 MB versus 32 MB, a 4x gap that typically benefits workloads with large working sets or frequent data reuse.

Memory support is DDR5 for both, with dual-channel buses. The 8745HX has a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, while the 9950X3D reaches 89.6 GB/s. The embedded part also supports ECC memory, which the mobile chip does not. PCIe lanes differ: the 8745HX has Gen 5 with 28 CPU lanes, while the 9950X3D has Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ. The 8745HX uses Radeon 610M, while the 9950X3D uses a generic Radeon Graphics solution. Both are active production parts, and both have unlocked multipliers. The 8745HX uses AMD Socket FL1, while the 9950X3D uses AMD Socket AM5. Release dates are months apart: the 8745HX launched in April 2025, the 9950X3D in October 2025.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons are not possible because the database contains no recorded scores for the Embedded 9950X3D. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and the win counts for both parts are zero. The only measured data comes from the 8745HX.

For the 8745HX, the recorded PassMark results establish a baseline. The multi-thread score of 31,517 and single-thread score of 3,879 represent the two aggregate measures. Data compression scores 363,759, which is the highest single test. Integer math scores 100,328, floating point math scores 61,972, and extended instructions scores 27,638. Random string sorting scores 44,494, data encryption scores 21,840, find prime numbers scores 159, and physics scores 1,681.

The nearest rivals for the 8745HX provide context. The AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX has an average score of 60,099 with a 0% delta, meaning the two are statistically tied. The Intel Core i9-14900F scores 60,008, which is 0.2% higher than the 8745HX's average of 60,104. The AMD Ryzen 9 7945HX3D scores 59,641, which is 0.8% lower. The Intel Xeon Gold 6338T scores 60,572, which is 0.8% higher. These deltas are all within 1%, indicating the 8745HX sits in a tightly clustered performance band among these four processors.

Because the 9950X3D has no scores, its relationship to the 8745HX cannot be expressed as a percentage advantage or deficit. The database simply has no measurements to draw from.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: What is the L3 cache difference between the two?

A: The 8745HX has 32 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 9950X3D has 128 MB of L3 cache. The embedded part has four times the L3 capacity.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D supports ECC memory. The AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX does not.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The 8745HX uses TSMC's 5 nm process, while the 9950X3D uses TSMC's 4 nm process.

Q: How does the 8745HX compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 8745HX's average benchmark score of 60,104 is within 0.8% of four rivals: the Ryzen 9 7945HX (60,099), Core i9-14900F (60,008), Ryzen 9 7945X3D (59,641), and Xeon Gold 6338T (60,572).

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The 9950X3D boosts to 5.70 GHz, while the 8745HX boosts to 5.10 GHz. The embedded part also has a higher base clock at 4.30 GHz versus 3.60 GHz.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX | AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Series | 8000 series | 9000 series |

| Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Threads | 16 | 32 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 4.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.70 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 170 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Dragon Range | Granite Ridge |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 6,570 million | 16,630 million |

| Die Size | 71 mm² | 2x 70.6 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB per core | 80 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 1 MB per core | 1 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 32 MB shared | 128 MB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 5, 28 lanes | Gen 5, 24 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 610M | Radeon Graphics |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | 2025-04-22 | 2025-10-06 |

| Part Number | 100-000001851 | 100-000000719E |

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case. The AMD Ryzen 7 8745HX is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark scores, and those scores demonstrate strong multi-threaded capability for a mobile chip. Its average benchmark score of 60,104 places it at the 92nd percentile of all CPUs, and it trades blows within 0.8% against desktop-class rivals like the Core i9-14900F and Xeon Gold 6338T. For mobile systems where power draw matters, its 55 W TDP and Radeon 610M integrated graphics make it a self-contained package.

The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9950X3D has no recorded benchmarks, so any choice between the two must rest on specifications. The embedded part offers double the cores and threads, a 4x larger L3 cache, support for ECC memory, and higher clock speeds across the board. Its 170 W TDP and AM5 socket indicate a stationary, power-tolerant environment. The 4 nm process and Zen 5 architecture represent a newer generation, and the dual-chiplet design with 16,630 million transistors suggests a part built for heavy server-side workloads.

For a laptop or compact mobile build, the 8745HX is the only option with measured performance data, and that data is solid. For an embedded or desktop workstation where ECC memory, massive cache, and core count are priorities, the 9950X3D offers the specification sheet to justify its selection, though its actual performance remains unquantified in the database. The choice is straightforward: measured mobile performance versus specified desktop throughput.