AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS vs AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE are both 8-core, 16-thread processors, but they target entirely different platforms and design goals. The 8845HS is a mobile chip built for high performance in laptops, while the 5755GE is a desktop-oriented, energy-efficient part. Benchmark data reveals a clear split: the 8845HS dominates in most computational tasks, winning 13 of 15 head-to-head tests, while the 5755GE claims two notable victories in Cinebench R23. The verdict for buyers is straightforward: if you need maximum throughput in a portable device, the 8845HS is the choice; if you require the specific platform compatibility of Socket AM4 with lower power consumption, the 5755GE is the only option here.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is the performance leader in nearly every measurable category. It wins 13 out of 15 direct comparisons, with particularly large margins in integer-heavy and mathematical workloads. The 8845HS outperforms the 5755GE by 74% in PassMark find prime numbers, 60.2% in PassMark physics, and 50.6% in PassMark extended instructions. These are not small gaps; they represent a generational leap in execution efficiency. For users who prioritize raw speed in everyday applications, video editing, or software development, the 8845HS is the superior processor.

However, the 5755GE is not without its merits. It wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 8.8% and single-core by 29.4% over the 8845HS. This is a surprising result given the 8845HS’s newer architecture and higher clock speeds. The 5755GE’s wins suggest that in sustained rendering workloads, it can hold its own or even surpass the mobile chip. This makes the 5755GE a viable choice for desktop users who prioritize Cinebench performance, or those who need a low-power (35W TDP) processor on the AM4 platform.

The choice ultimately hinges on the platform and workload. The 8845HS is designed for mobile systems with its FP8 socket and DDR5 memory support, while the 5755GE fits into desktop AM4 boards with DDR4. If you are building a desktop system and need a 35W processor, the 5755GE is your pick. If you are selecting a laptop CPU, the 8845HS is the faster option. The data does not support a universal winner; it supports a platform-specific decision.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS has an average benchmark score of 29955, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE has an average score of 29656. This puts the 8845HS slightly ahead by about 1% overall.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE wins this test with a score of 17759, compared to the 8845HS’s 16192. This represents a deltaPct of -8.8% for the 8845HS, meaning the 5755GE is 8.8% faster in this specific multi-core rendering test.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two in any benchmark?

A: The largest delta is in PassMark find prime numbers, where the 8845HS scores 87 versus the 5755GE’s 50. This gives the 8845HS a 74% advantage, making it the most lopsided victory in the head-to-head dataset.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No, neither the AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS nor the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE supports ECC memory. Both list "eccMemory": false in their specifications.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS has a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The 8845HS is 0.50 GHz higher in this metric.

Q: How do they compare in single-thread performance in PassMark?

A: The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS scores 3738 in PassMark single-thread, while the 5755GE scores 3353. This gives the 8845HS an 11.5% lead in this test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS uses the Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE uses the older Zen 3 architecture, codenamed Cezanne. This architectural gap is the primary driver of their performance differences.

The 8845HS is manufactured on a 4 nm process node at TSMC, whereas the 5755GE uses a 7 nm process node. This smaller node allows the 8845HS to pack more transistors: 25,000 million versus the 5755GE’s 10,700 million. Interestingly, the die sizes are similar, with the 8845HS at 178 mm² and the 5755GE at 180 mm², meaning the 8845HS fits significantly more transistors into nearly the same physical space.

Cache configurations also differ. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 16 MB of L3 cache. However, the 8845HS has 1 MB of L2 cache per core, while the 5755GE has 512 KB per core. This doubles the L2 cache capacity for the 8845HS, which can improve performance in workloads that repeatedly access working data sets.

The integrated graphics are also different. The 8845HS features a Radeon 780M, while the 5755GE has a Radeon Vega 8. The 780M is a more modern GPU design, though the benchmark data does not directly compare their graphics performance. The 8845HS also supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, whereas the 5755GE supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes.

Specification Differences

The core specs are identical in count: both have 8 cores and 16 threads. The differences lie in clocks, power, and platform support.

The base clock of the 8845HS is 3.80 GHz versus 3.20 GHz for the 5755GE, and the boost clock is 5.10 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. The 8845HS has a higher TDP of 45W, compared to 35W for the 5755GE, which explains its higher clock speeds.

The 8845HS uses AMD Socket FP8 and supports DDR5 memory with a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The 5755GE uses AMD Socket AM4 and supports DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 51.2 GB/s. The memory bus is dual-channel for both, but the newer DDR5 standard gives the 8845HS a significant bandwidth advantage.

The 8845HS is part of the 8000 series, while the 5755GE is part of the 5000 series. The release dates differ: the 8845HS was released on 2023-12-05, and the 5755GE on 2024-09-04. The 8845HS is marked as a Mobile segment processor, while the 5755GE is Desktop. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are currently in Active production.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a dominant performance from the 8845HS, with 13 wins against 2 for the 5755GE. The biggest wins for the 8845HS come in compute-intensive tasks.

In PassMark find prime numbers, the 8845HS scores 87 versus 50, a 74% advantage. This is the largest deltaPct in the dataset. PassMark physics shows a 60.2% lead for the 8845HS, with scores of 1347 versus 841. PassMark extended instructions gives the 8845HS a 50.6% win (25642 vs 17029). PassMark random string sorting is another strong result, with the 8845HS winning by 51.4% (41446 vs 27373).

The 8845HS also wins in more common workloads. PassMark multi-thread shows a 36.6% lead (28498 vs 20870). PassMark data compression is 36.2% higher (344439 vs 252937). PassMark floating point math is 27.2% higher (59254 vs 46589). PassMark data encryption is 20.5% higher (20416 vs 16937). PassMark integer math is 16.4% higher (97747 vs 84004). PassMark single-thread is 11.5% higher (3738 vs 3353).

In Cinebench R15, the 8845HS wins multi-core by 43.9% (2575 vs 1789) and single-core by 9.5% (276 vs 252). This aligns with the general trend of the 8845HS being faster in most tests.

The 5755GE’s wins come in Cinebench R23. It scores 17759 in multi-core versus 16192 for the 8845HS, a deltaPct of -8.8% for the 8845HS. In single-core, the 5755GE scores 2507 versus 1769, a 29.4% advantage for the 5755GE. These are substantial wins, showing that the 5755GE has a particular strength in the Cinebench R23 rendering workload.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 7 8845HS is the clear winner for general-purpose computing and most intensive tasks. Its 74% lead in prime number finding indicates superior integer arithmetic capabilities. The 60.2% win in physics simulations and 50.6% win in extended instructions make it ideal for scientific computing, engineering simulations, and code compilation. The 36.6% lead in multi-threaded PassMark suggests better overall throughput for multitasking and parallel workloads.

For creative professionals, the 8845HS wins in data compression (36.2%), floating point math (27.2%), and integer math (16.4%), which are relevant to video encoding, 3D rendering, and image processing. Its single-thread advantage of 11.5% also helps in applications that rely on a few fast cores.

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755GE is the winner only in Cinebench R23. Its 8.8% multi-core win and 29.4% single-core win in this specific benchmark suggest it has an optimized rendering pipeline for Cinema 4D and similar software. If a user’s primary workload is Cinebench-based rendering, the 5755GE is the better choice.

Beyond benchmarks, the 5755GE wins on platform compatibility. It uses Socket AM4 and DDR4 memory, which are widely available and cost-effective for desktop builds. Its 35W TDP makes it suitable for low-power or compact desktop systems where heat output is a concern. The 8845HS, with its 45W TDP and FP8 socket, is designed exclusively for mobile laptops, offering portability but not desktop upgradability.