AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX vs AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HS and AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX are both 8-core, 16-thread mobile processors, but they represent two distinct generations of AMD’s mobile lineup. The 7940HS is a 7000-series part built on the Zen 4 architecture, while the 5980HX is a 5000-series chip based on Zen 3. Benchmark data shows the newer chip dominates the head-to-head comparisons, winning 15 of 17 tests, yet the older 5980HX retains surprising strength in a few specific workloads. This analysis breaks down where each processor excels, what architectural changes drove those results, and which type of user should favor one over the other.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Ryzen 9 7940HS’s most decisive victories come in multi-threaded and compute-heavy workloads. In Geekbench multicore, the 7940HS scores 12,724 against the 5980HX’s 7,723, a massive 64.8% advantage. PassMark physics shows a similar gap, with the 7940HS scoring 1,450 versus 881, another 64.6% delta. These results indicate the Zen 4 chip delivers substantially higher sustained throughput when all cores are active, likely due to its newer architecture and higher boost clocks.

The 7940HS also wins in single-threaded performance, though by a smaller margin. Geekbench single-core sees the 7940HS at 2,144 versus 1,930 for the 5980HX, an 11.1% lead. PassMark single-thread shows 3,878 against 3,326, a 16.6% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core is nearly a tie, with the 7940HS at 283 and the 5980HX at 282, a 0.4% difference. These numbers suggest the 7940HS has a modest IPC advantage per core, but not an overwhelming one.

In math and encryption workloads, the 7940HS consistently pulls ahead. PassMark find prime numbers shows the 7940HS at 92 versus 53, a 73.6% win — its largest single delta. Floating-point math goes 62,897 to 50,223, a 25.2% lead. Integer math is 103,044 against 89,772, a 14.8% advantage. Data encryption sees 21,777 versus 19,221, a 13.3% win. Extended instructions (SIMD) favor the 7940HS at 27,480 versus 21,209, a 29.6% margin. Data compression is also strong for the new chip: 365,352 versus 310,694, a 17.6% lead, while random string sorting goes 42,386 to 32,238, a 31.5% win.

The 5980HX’s only wins come in Cinebench R23. In multicore, the 5980HX scores 19,850 against the 7940HS’s 16,713, a 15.8% advantage. In single-core, it scores 2,802 versus 1,790, a 36.1% lead. These are striking results, as they contradict the overall trend. The R23 numbers suggest the 5980HX can sustain higher performance in this specific benchmark, possibly due to its higher 45W TDP versus the 7940HS’s 35W TDP, allowing for more aggressive power draw under load.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the 7940HS wins decisively at 2,656 versus 2,000, a 32.8% margin. But R23 tells a different story, indicating that benchmark-specific behavior — such as thermal or power management — can flip the outcome. The 7940HS also wins PassMark multithread at 30,098 versus 23,356, a 28.9% lead, reinforcing that the R23 result is an outlier rather than the norm.

Overall, the data shows the 7940HS is faster in nearly every measurable category, with double-digit percentage wins in most tests. The 5980HX’s R23 victories are significant but isolated. For users relying on Cinebench R23 as a primary metric, the 5980HX offers a real advantage. For everything else, the 7940HS is the clear performance leader.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are separated by two full architecture generations. The 7940HS uses Zen 4, codenamed Phoenix, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. The 5980HX uses Zen 3, codenamed Cezanne, on a 7 nm TSMC process. This node shrink is a major factor in the 7940HS’s efficiency and performance gains. The 7940HS packs 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the 5980HX has 10,700 million transistors on a 180 mm² die. The newer chip manages to fit more than double the transistors in a slightly smaller area, proof of the denser 4 nm process.

Core counts are identical: both have 8 cores and 16 threads. The 7940HS has a base clock of 4.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the 5980HX runs at 3.30 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The 7940HS’s higher clocks — especially the 0.4 GHz boost advantage — contribute to its single-threaded wins. The 7940HS also has a lower TDP at 35W versus the 5980HX’s 45W, meaning it achieves higher performance while drawing less power, a clear architectural improvement.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The 7940HS has 64 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core, while the 5980HX has 64 KB of L1 per core but only 512 KB of L2 per core. Both share 16 MB of L3 cache. The larger L2 cache on the 7940HS likely helps with data locality and reduces latency, contributing to its math and compression wins.

Memory support is a major divergence. The 7940HS supports DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The 5980HX uses DDR4, also dual-channel, but with only 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. This 31% bandwidth advantage for the 7940HS is a key reason it excels in memory-intensive workloads like physics and data compression. The 7940HS also supports ECC memory, while the 5980HX does not.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The 7940HS offers PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the 5980HX is limited to PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. This gives the newer chip faster I/O for GPUs and NVMe drives. Integrated graphics also differ: the 7940HS ships with a Radeon 780M, while the 5980HX has a Radeon Vega 8. The 780M is a more modern iGPU, though no benchmark data is provided for either.

The 5980HX has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the 7940HS does not. The socket types differ too: the 7940HS uses AMD Socket FP8, while the 5980HX uses FP6. The 5980HX was released on 2021-01-11, while the 7940HS has no release date listed. Both processors remain in active production.

The Verdict

The data overwhelmingly favors the Ryzen 9 7940HS for most users. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, with victories ranging from 0.4% to 73.6%. The largest wins come in multi-threaded and compute workloads, where the 7940HS leads by 25% to 65% in tests like Geekbench multicore, PassMark physics, and find prime numbers. Its higher boost clock, larger L2 cache, DDR5 support, and 4 nm process all contribute to this dominance.

The Ryzen 9 5980HX is the better choice only for users who prioritize Cinebench R23 scores. In that benchmark, the 5980HX leads by 15.8% in multicore and 36.1% in single-core. If your workflow relies heavily on Cinebench R23 as a rendering or simulation benchmark, the older chip offers a genuine advantage. Its higher 45W TDP likely allows for more sustained power draw, which can help in long-running renders.

For all other workloads — including general productivity, math, encryption, compression, and physics — the 7940HS is the superior processor. It also offers modern features like DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 4, which the 5980HX lacks. The 7940HS achieves this performance at a lower 35W TDP, making it more power-efficient. The 5980HX’s unlocked multiplier is a niche feature for overclocking enthusiasts, but the 7940HS does not need overclocking to outperform it in most tests.

The average benchmark scores reflect this: the 7940HS averages 31,593, while the 5980HX averages 31,495, a difference of just 0.3%. Both chips sit at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs. The nearest rivals for both include the Intel Core i5-13500 and Intel Core Ultra 5 225H, with delta percentages of 0.3% or less. This shows that while the two AMD chips are close in overall average performance, the 7940HS wins in the vast majority of specific tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded performance?

A: The Ryzen 9 7940HS wins in most single-threaded tests. Geekbench single-core shows 2,144 versus 1,930 (11.1% lead), and PassMark single-thread shows 3,878 versus 3,326 (16.6% lead). The only exception is Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 5980HX wins at 2,802 versus 1,790 (36.1% lead).

Q: Why does the 5980HX win in Cinebench R23?

A: The 5980HX scores 19,850 in R23 multicore versus 16,713 for the 7940HS, a 15.8% advantage. This likely stems from its higher 45W TDP, which allows more sustained power draw. However, this result is isolated, as the 7940HS wins in Cinebench R15 multicore by 32.8% and in all other multi-threaded tests.

Q: Does the 7940HS have better memory support?

A: Yes. The 7940HS supports DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The 5980HX uses DDR4 with dual-channel memory and 68.3 GB/s bandwidth. The 7940HS also supports ECC memory, which the 5980HX does not.

Q: Are both processors 8-core and 16-thread?

A: Yes, both the 7940HS and 5980HX have 8 cores and 16 threads. However, the 7940HS uses Zen 4 architecture on a 4 nm process, while the 5980HX uses Zen 3 on a 7 nm process.

Q: Which chip has a higher boost clock?

A: The 7940HS has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the 5980HX boosts to 4.80 GHz. The 7940HS also has a higher base clock at 4.00 GHz versus 3.30 GHz.

Q: Is the 5980HX overclockable?

A: Yes, the 5980HX has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The 7940HS does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 9 7940HS wins in the overwhelming majority of workloads. Its largest advantages are in compute-heavy tasks: PassMark find prime numbers (73.6% lead), Geekbench multicore (64.8%), and PassMark physics (64.6%). These results make it the clear choice for scientific computing, engineering simulations, and any workload that stresses integer or floating-point math. It also wins in data compression (17.6%), encryption (13.3%), and extended instructions (29.6%), making it better for file archiving, security, and SIMD-heavy applications like video encoding.

The 7940HS also wins in memory-sensitive tasks due to its DDR5 support and higher bandwidth. PassMark multithread (28.9% lead) and random string sorting (31.5%) benefit from faster memory access. Its higher single-thread scores in Geekbench (11.1%) and PassMark (16.6%) make it better for everyday responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications. The 7940HS is also more power-efficient, achieving higher performance at a 35W TDP versus the 5980HX’s 45W, which translates to better battery life in laptops.

The Ryzen 9 5980HX wins in exactly two benchmarks: Cinebench R23 multicore (15.8% lead) and single-core (36.1% lead). If your primary workload is Cinebench R23 — often used for 3D rendering or animation previews — the 5980HX is the better pick. Its higher 45W TDP allows it to sustain heavy loads, which can be beneficial for long render times. The unlocked multiplier also makes it attractive to enthusiasts who want to push clocks manually.

For every other use case, the 7940HS is the superior processor. It offers modern features like DDR5, PCIe Gen 4, and a more advanced 4 nm process. Its wins in 15 of 17 benchmarks, including a 64.8% lead in Geekbench multicore, make it the more versatile and future-proof choice. The 5980HX remains a capable chip for Cinebench-focused workflows, but the 7940HS is the better all-rounder.