Ryzen 5 1600 vs Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 345 | 882 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 51 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 13.26 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Architecture codename | Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 13 June 2023 (1 year ago) | 11 April 2017 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $219 |
| Current price | no data | $115 (0.5x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600 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 | 3.8 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 178 mm2 | 192 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600 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 configuration | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FP7/FP8 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
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 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 116% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 109% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 135% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 79% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 116% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS outperforms Ryzen 5 1600 by 83% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 17.14 | 7.94 |
| Recency | 13 June 2023 | 11 April 2017 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 6 |
| Threads | 16 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
The Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 5 1600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 1600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 7840HS and Ryzen 5 1600, 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.
