Ryzen 7 4800HS vs Ryzen 5 2600X

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 2600X
2018
6 cores / 12 threads, 95 Watt
9.09
Ryzen 7 4800HS
2020
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
11.98
+31.8%

Ryzen 7 4800HS outperforms Ryzen 5 2600X by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking860669
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.80no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5AMD Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU)
Power efficiency8.7331.21
Architecture codenameZen+ (2018−2019)Renoir-HS (Zen 2) (2020)
Release date13 April 2018 (6 years ago)16 March 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores6 (Hexa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1216
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz4.2 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier3629
L1 cache576 KB512 KB
L2 cache3 MB4 MB
L3 cache16 MB (shared)8 MB
Chip lithography12 nm7 nm
Die size213 mm2156 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors4800 Million9800 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FP6
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHAMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR4
Maximum memory size64 GB64 GB
Max memory channels24
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/s68.27 GB/s
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon Vega 7

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes20no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 5 2600X 9.09
Ryzen 7 4800HS 11.98
+31.8%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Ryzen 5 2600X 13908
Ryzen 7 4800HS 18333
+31.8%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 5 2600X 1248
Ryzen 7 4800HS 1438
+15.2%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 5 2600X 5285
Ryzen 7 4800HS 6007
+13.7%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 5 2600X 4958
Ryzen 7 4800HS 5705
+15.1%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 5 2600X 29954
Ryzen 7 4800HS 36313
+21.2%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 5 2600X 4.62
Ryzen 7 4800HS 4.11
+12.4%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 5 2600X 15
Ryzen 7 4800HS 20
+37%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 5 2600X 1341
Ryzen 7 4800HS 1701
+26.8%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 5 2600X 163
Ryzen 7 4800HS 187
+14.4%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 5 2600X 1.81
Ryzen 7 4800HS 2.19
+21%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 5 2600X 8
Ryzen 7 4800HS 10.3
+28.8%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 5 2600X 81
Ryzen 7 4800HS 99
+23%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 5 2600X 207
Ryzen 7 4800HS 217
+4.4%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 5 2600X 4599
Ryzen 7 4800HS 4642
+0.9%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 5 2600X 6094
Ryzen 7 4800HS 7611
+24.9%

Blender(-)

Ryzen 5 2600X 352
+23.9%
Ryzen 7 4800HS 284

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 5 2600X 1145
Ryzen 7 4800HS 1191
+4%

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 5 2600X 4293
Ryzen 7 4800HS 4655
+8.4%

7-Zip

Ryzen 5 2600X 33222
Ryzen 7 4800HS 48392
+45.7%

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 5 2600X 186
Ryzen 7 4800HS 214
+15.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.09 11.98
Recency 13 April 2018 16 March 2020
Physical cores 6 8
Threads 12 16
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

Ryzen 7 4800HS has a 31.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 71.4% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 7 4800HS is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 2600X in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 5 2600X is a desktop processor while Ryzen 7 4800HS is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 2600X and Ryzen 7 4800HS, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 5 2600X
Ryzen 5 2600X
AMD Ryzen 7 4800HS
Ryzen 7 4800HS

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.4 2278 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 263 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 4800HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 5 2600X or Ryzen 7 4800HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.