Apple M3 Pro 12-Core vs Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Apple M3 Pro 12-Core by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Apple M3 Pro 12-Core processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 392 | 416 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) | Apple M3 |
| Power efficiency | 45.51 | 56.47 |
| Architecture codename | Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023) | no data |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 30 October 2023 (1 year ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Apple M3 Pro 12-Core 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 cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.748 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 4.06 GHz |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 178 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 37000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Apple M3 Pro 12-Core 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.
| Socket | FP7/FP8 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 27 Watt |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon 780M ( - 2700 MHz) | Apple M3 Pro 18-Core GPU |
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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core
Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core
WebXPRT 3
CrossMark Overall
Geekbench 6.3 Multi-Core
Geekbench 6.3 Single-Core
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 16.83 | 16.11 |
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 30 October 2023 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 12 |
| Threads | 16 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 27 Watt |
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS has a 4.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 33.3% more threads.
Apple M3 Pro 12-Core, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, 50% more physical cores, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 29.6% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Apple M3 Pro 12-Core.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Apple M3 Pro 12-Core, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
