AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 vs AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345, which wins 14 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests. The only exception is Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 edges ahead by a narrow 0.6 percent, scoring 1723 against 1712. That single win, however, is the sole bright spot for the 445 in an otherwise one-sided comparison.

The largest margin comes in PassMark data encryption, where the 345 leads by 12.3 percent, posting 11814 points versus 10519. PassMark physics shows an 11.6 percent advantage for the 345, with scores of 1089 and 976 respectively. The 345 also wins PassMark find prime numbers by 10.7 percent, delivering 62 points against 56.

Multi-core performance splits notably between the two Cinebench versions. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 345 takes an 8.2 percent lead, scoring 11461 versus 10590. Yet in Cinebench R15 multi-core, the 445 reverses that result, albeit by a much smaller margin. This suggests the newer Gorgon Point design handles the older R15 workload slightly better, while the Krackan Point part scales more effectively in the R23 test.

Single-core results favor the 345 across the board. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 6.7 percent advantage for the 345, with 271 points against 254. Cinebench R23 single-core delivers a smaller 0.7 percent edge, 1818 versus 1806. PassMark single-thread tests confirm the pattern, with the 345 at 3875 points and the 445 at 3591, a 7.9 percent gap.

Integer and floating-point workloads both lean toward the 345. PassMark integer math scores 63475 for the 345, an 8.8 percent lead over the 445's 58332. PassMark floating-point math shows an 8.3 percent advantage, 42621 versus 39362. Extended instructions follow the same trajectory: the 345 posts 17003 points, 7.4 percent ahead of the 445's 15826.

Data compression and multithreaded scenarios also favor the 345. PassMark data compression sees a 10 percent difference, with the 345 at 237484 and the 445 at 215812. PassMark multithread mirrors that exact 10 percent delta, 19927 against 18115. Random string sorting completes the picture with an 8.3 percent win for the 345, 25435 versus 23488.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins the majority of benchmark comparisons?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 wins 14 out of 15 head-to-head tests. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 wins only one test, Cinebench R15 multi-core, by a 0.6 percent margin.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two processors?

A: The largest delta appears in PassMark data encryption, where the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 leads by 12.3 percent. PassMark physics follows closely at 11.6 percent in favor of the 345.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 leads in every recorded single-thread test. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 6.7 percent advantage, Cinebench R23 single-core shows 0.7 percent, and PassMark single-thread shows 7.9 percent.

Q: Is there any workload where the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 outperforms the 345?

A: Yes, in Cinebench R15 multi-core the 445 scores 1723 versus 1712 for the 345, a 0.6 percent win. No other benchmark in the recorded data favors the 445.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 has an average benchmark score of 29461, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 averages 26936. The 345 also sits at the 81st percentile among all CPUs, versus the 79th percentile for the 445.

Q: What does the nearest rival data indicate about each CPU's competitive position?

A: The 345 lands within 0.7 percent of the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X, AMD EPYC 9654, and Intel Core i5-13500HX. The 445 sits within 0.6 percent of the Intel Core i7-1370P, AMD Ryzen 5 7545U, AMD Ryzen 7 5700G, and Intel Core i9-9900K.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share several foundational traits. Each uses a 4 nm TSMC process node, features 6 cores and 12 threads, and carries the AMD Socket FP8 interface. The integrated graphics are identical, with both parts using the Radeon 840M. Memory support matches as well, covering DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel operation and 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth.

The key architectural split appears in codename and generation. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 uses the Krackan Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation built on Zen 5 / Zen 5c. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 uses the Gorgon Point codename and belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation, also built on Zen 5 / Zen 5c but with an explicit "Zen 5" architecture field recorded for the 445. The 345's architecture field is not recorded in the database, so the direct comparison relies on the generation labels.

Cache hierarchies are identical on paper. Both CPUs provide 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of L3 cache. No 3D V-Cache is present on either part. The PCIe configuration also matches, with Gen 4 support and 14 lanes available from the CPU only.

ECC memory support differs. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 records ECC memory as supported, while the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 does not. This is a notable distinction for workloads that require error-correcting memory, even though both CPUs otherwise share the same memory feature set.

Release timing separates the two as well. The 345 carries a release date of 2025-01-14, while the 445 arrives later with a release date of 2026-01-04. Both parts remain in active production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs share identical core counts, thread counts, base clocks, boost clocks, TDP, socket, process node, foundry, cache sizes, memory support, memory bus width, memory bandwidth, PCIe generation and lane count, integrated graphics, market segment, production status, and multiplier lock state. Both run at 2.00 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost, with a 28 W TDP.

The recorded specification differences are limited to four fields. The architecture field lists "Zen 5" for the 445 while the 345 has no recorded architecture value. The codename differs, with the 345 using Krackan Point and the 445 using Gorgon Point. The generation label differs, showing Ryzen AI 300 for the 345 and Ryzen AI 400 for the 445. ECC memory support also differs, with the 445 supporting ECC and the 345 not.

Part numbers further distinguish the units. The 345 carries part number 100-000002122, while the 445 carries 100-000001935. Release dates differ as noted, with the 345 releasing earlier. No launch MSRP is recorded for either processor.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 establishes dominance across almost every measured workload category. Its 14 benchmark wins cover single-threaded tasks, multi-threaded tasks, integer math, floating-point math, encryption, compression, physics, extended instructions, prime number finding, and random string sorting. For users running general productivity, content creation, or mixed workloads, the data consistently points to the 345 as the stronger performer.

The 345's average benchmark score of 29461 places it at the 81st percentile among all CPUs, and its nearest rivals include desktop parts like the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X and the Intel Core i5-13500HX. The margin over the 445's average of 26936 is substantial, roughly 9.4 percent based on the recorded averages. The 345 also wins the Cinebench R23 multi-core test by 8.2 percent, indicating better sustained multi-core throughput in modern rendering workloads.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 claims only one victory, in Cinebench R15 multi-core. That test favors the 445 by a marginal 0.6 percent, which may reflect specific workload characteristics of the older benchmark rather than a general advantage. The 445's 79th percentile ranking and nearest rival set, which includes the Intel Core i7-1370P and AMD Ryzen 7 5700G, show it competes in a slightly lower performance tier.

For ECC memory support, the 445 holds a unique advantage. The database records ECC as supported on the 445 but not on the 345. That makes the 445 the only choice between the two for systems requiring error-correcting memory, despite its lower benchmark scores elsewhere.

The 345 wins on raw performance in nearly all scenarios, while the 445 wins on the narrower field of ECC capability and the single Cinebench R15 multi-core result. Users prioritizing maximum throughput across diverse workloads should look to the 345. Those with explicit ECC requirements have no option but the 445, accepting its lower scores in exchange for that memory feature.