Ryzen 7 7840U vs Ryzen 7 2700

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 7 2700
2018
8 cores / 16 threads, 65 Watt
10.26
Ryzen 7 7840U
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 28 Watt
16.32
+59.1%

Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Ryzen 7 2700 by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking773423
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.04no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 7AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040)
Power efficiency14.3953.15
Architecture codenameZen+ (2018−2019)Phoenix-U (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date19 April 2018 (6 years ago)May 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1616
Base clock speed3.2 GHz3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier32no data
L1 cache96K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography12 nm4 nm
Die size192 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U 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
SocketAM4FP8
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt28 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.2, SSE4A, AMD-V, AES, AVX2, FMA3, SHAno data
AES-NI++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR5-5600
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon 780M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes2020

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 7 2700 10.26
Ryzen 7 7840U 16.32
+59.1%

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 7 2700 15700
Ryzen 7 7840U 24975
+59.1%

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 7 2700 1121
Ryzen 7 7840U 2082
+85.7%

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 7 2700 5529
Ryzen 7 7840U 8736
+58%

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 7 2700 4505
Ryzen 7 7840U 6669
+48%

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 7 2700 31385
Ryzen 7 7840U 38490
+22.6%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Ryzen 7 2700 9475
Ryzen 7 7840U 12482
+31.7%

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 7 2700 5.14
Ryzen 7 7840U 3.51
+46.4%

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 7 2700 17
Ryzen 7 7840U 23
+35.4%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

Ryzen 7 2700 1551
Ryzen 7 7840U 1990
+28.3%

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 7 2700 161
Ryzen 7 7840U 264
+64%

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 7 2700 1.78
Ryzen 7 7840U 2.79
+56.7%

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 7 2700 9
+6.5%
Ryzen 7 7840U 8.5

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 7 2700 90
Ryzen 7 7840U 109
+21.3%

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 7 2700 196
Ryzen 7 7840U 237
+21.3%

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 7 2700 4440
Ryzen 7 7840U 5723
+28.9%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 7 2700 6560
Ryzen 7 7840U 9382
+43%

Blender(-)

Ryzen 7 2700 308
+18.8%
Ryzen 7 7840U 260

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 7 2700 1000
Ryzen 7 7840U 1738
+73.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.26 16.32
Chip lithography 12 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 28 Watt

Ryzen 7 7840U has a 59.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 200% more advanced lithography process, and 132.1% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 7 7840U is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 7 2700 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 7 2700 is a desktop processor while Ryzen 7 7840U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 2700 and Ryzen 7 7840U, 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 7 2700
Ryzen 7 2700
AMD Ryzen 7 7840U
Ryzen 7 7840U

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.


4.2 3067 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 2700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 232 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7840U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 7 2700 or Ryzen 7 7840U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.