AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX, which wins 9 of the 11 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The most dramatic separation occurs in passmark_find_prime_numbers, where the 8840HX scores 304 versus 71 for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164, a 328.2% advantage. That result is the largest delta in the entire comparison and indicates a fundamental difference in integer-heavy workload execution.

The Ryzen 7 8840HX leads by substantial margins across nearly every multithreaded and compute-intensive test. In passmark_data_encryption, it scores 29919 against 16055, a 86.4% advantage. The physics test shows a similar pattern: 2185 versus 1210, an 80.6% lead. Integer math delivers 146506 versus 87940, a 66.6% difference, while random string sorting matches that exact 66.6% delta with scores of 57971 and 34801.

Multithreaded performance follows the same direction. The 8840HX records 41732 in passmark_multithread versus 25889 for the P164, a 61.2% gap. Floating point math shows 86747 against 55799, a 55.5% delta. Data compression comes in at 496427 versus 327891, a 51.4% lead, and extended instructions score 36527 versus 24193, a 51% difference.

The single exception to this pattern is single-thread performance. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 wins both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread with a score of 4029 against 3958 for the 8840HX, a 1.8% advantage. That is a narrow margin, but it is the only benchmark where the P164 comes out ahead, and it repeats across both recorded single-thread entries.

The overall average benchmark score confirms the separation. The 8840HX averages 71797, while the P164 averages 52901. The 8840HX sits at the 94th percentile among all CPUs in the database, and the P164 sits at the 91st percentile. Both are high performers, but the gap in raw scores is significant.

Nearest rival data places each processor in a different competitive tier. The 8840HX is within 0.8% of several Intel Xeon workstation parts, including the Intel Xeon 6724P and Intel Xeon 6517P (both at -0.8%), and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8270 at 0.6%. The P164, by contrast, sits within 0.7% of desktop parts like the AMD Ryzen 9 7900X (-0.7%) and the AMD EPYC 7313P (-0.6%), with the AMD Ryzen 5 9500F at 0.1% ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 7 8840HX dominates every category that requires multiple cores, sustained throughput, or heavy parallel computation. The data compression test, which stresses memory access patterns and core scaling, favors the 8840HX by 51.4%. Encryption workloads, which are often limited by core count and cache efficiency, show an even larger 86.4% lead. The 328.2% difference in prime number finding suggests the 8840HX handles recursive integer operations far more efficiently, likely a result of its larger L3 cache and higher core count.

The P164 wins only in single-thread performance, and the margin is small. Its 4029 single-thread score versus 3958 represents a 1.8% advantage. That result indicates the P164's Zen 5 architecture has a per-core efficiency edge in lightly threaded tasks, but the effect is modest. In every workload that scales across cores, the 8840HX's 12 cores and 24 threads overwhelm the P164's 8 cores and 16 threads.

For users running multithreaded rendering, compilation, scientific simulation, or data processing, the 8840HX is the clear choice based on the recorded scores. For workloads that are strictly single-threaded and do not benefit from additional cores, the P164 offers a marginal improvement, but the difference is small enough that it may not be noticeable in real-world applications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use different architectures, process nodes, and physical designs. The Ryzen 7 8840HX is built on Zen 4 with the codename Dragon Range and belongs to the Ryzen 7 generation. It uses a 5 nm process from TSMC and contains 13,140 million transistors across a dual-die design with each die measuring 71 mm². The P164 uses Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores under the Gorgon Point codename, belongs to the Ryzen AI Embedded generation, and is manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process with a single die measuring 233 mm².

Core counts differ significantly. The 8840HX has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads. Cache configurations also diverge. The 8840HX provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 64 MB L3 cache. The P164 provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and only 8 MB of shared L3. The 64 MB L3 cache on the 8840HX is a major factor in its multithreaded and data-heavy benchmark advantages, as it reduces reliance on slower main memory accesses.

Clock speeds tell a mixed story. The 8840HX has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the P164 runs at 2.00 GHz base and 5.00 GHz boost. The higher base clock on the 8840HX helps sustain performance under load, while the similar boost clocks mean peak single-thread speed is close, which aligns with the narrow single-thread benchmark result.

Memory support differs in type and bandwidth. The 8840HX supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s. The P164 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a slightly higher bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The P164 also supports ECC memory, while the 8840HX does not. PCIe connectivity favors the 8840HX with Gen 5 and 28 lanes, versus Gen 4 and 16 lanes on the P164.

Thermal design power differs considerably. The 8840HX carries a 55 W TDP, while the P164 is rated at 28 W. That 27 W difference explains part of the performance gap, as the 8840HX has more thermal headroom to sustain high clocks across all cores. The P164's lower TDP positions it for more power-constrained designs.

Integrated graphics also differ. The 8840HX uses a Radeon 610M, while the P164 uses a Radeon 880M. The P164's newer graphics core and higher memory bandwidth suggest better integrated graphics performance, though no benchmark data is recorded for GPU tasks.

The 8840HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the P164 does not. The 8840HX uses the AMD Socket FL1, and the P164 uses AMD Socket FP8. The 8840HX was released on 2025-04-22, and the P164 on 2026-03-08.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX has an average benchmark score of 71797, compared to 52901 for the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the P164 wins both single-thread benchmarks with a score of 4029 versus 3958 for the 8840HX, a 1.8% advantage.

Q: How much larger is the L3 cache on the 8840HX?

A: The 8840HX has a shared 64 MB L3 cache, while the P164 has only 8 MB of shared L3.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX does not.

Q: What is the core and thread count difference?

A: The 8840HX has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the P164 has 8 cores and 16 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The 8840HX is rated at 55 W TDP, while the P164 is rated at 28 W TDP.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload requirements. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX is the stronger processor for multithreaded and compute-heavy tasks. Its 12-core, 24-thread configuration, combined with a 64 MB L3 cache and 55 W TDP, delivers 51% to 328% advantages across every parallel benchmark recorded. The 86.4% lead in encryption and 80.6% lead in physics indicate that sustained multicore workloads will see substantial gains on the 8840HX.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 is the better choice only for single-threaded workloads, where its 1.8% advantage in passmark_single_thread is the sole recorded win. That edge is small and unlikely to matter in most applications. The P164 does offer ECC memory support, a lower 28 W TDP, and newer Zen 5 architecture, which may matter for specific embedded or reliability-focused use cases, but the benchmark data does not show a performance justification for choosing it over the 8840HX.

The 94th percentile ranking of the 8840HX versus the 91st percentile of the P164 confirms that both are high-end parts, but the 8840HX sits in a higher competitive tier. Its nearest rivals include Intel Xeon workstation processors, while the P164's nearest rivals are desktop Ryzen and EPYC parts. For any workload that can use multiple cores, the 8840HX is the clear winner in the recorded data.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 7 8840HX | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P164 |

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

| Cores | 12 | 8 |

| Threads | 24 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.10 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Zen 4 | Zen 5 / Zen 5c |

| Codename | Dragon Range | Gorgon Point |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 13,140 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 2x 71 mm² | 233 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB (shared) | 8 MB |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Dual-channel |

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

| ECC Memory | false | true |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 610M | Radeon 880M |

| Multiplier Unlocked | true | false |

| Release Date | 2025-04-22 | 2026-03-08 |