Ryzen 5 PRO 7640HS vs Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS outperforms Ryzen 5 PRO 7640HS by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Ryzen 5 PRO 7640HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 373 | 530 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) | AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) |
| Power efficiency | 47.67 | 25.04 |
| Architecture codename | Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023) | Phoenix (Zen4) (2023) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 5 January 2023 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Ryzen 5 PRO 7640HS 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 4 GHz | 4.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.2 GHz | 5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | 16 MB |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | 178 mm2 | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 100 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS and Ryzen 5 PRO 7640HS 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 | 54 Watt |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare Radeon 760M and Radeon 780M | AMD Radeon 780M ( - 2800 MHz) | AMD Radeon 760M ( - 2600 MHz) |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
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.
Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core
Blender(-)
Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core
7-Zip Single
7-Zip
WebXPRT 3
Blender v3.3 Classroom CPU(-)
Geekbench 6.3 Multi-Core
Geekbench 6.3 Single-Core
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 17.52 | 14.20 |
| Integrated graphics card | 15.68 | 12.74 |
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 5 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 6 |
| Threads | 16 | 12 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 54 Watt |
Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS has a 23.4% higher aggregate performance score, 23.1% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 months, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and 54.3% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen 9 PRO 7940HS is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 PRO 7640HS in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
