Ryzen 7 9800X3D vs Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS
2022
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
14.29
Ryzen 7 9800X3D
2024
8 cores / 16 threads, 120 Watt
25.27
+76.8%

Ryzen 7 9800X3D outperforms Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS by an impressive 77% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking508203
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data44.61
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
Power efficiency38.6619.94
Architecture codenameRembrandt-HS (Zen 3+) (2022)Granite Ridge (2024)
Release date19 April 2022 (2 years ago)7 November 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$479

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D 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 speed3.3 GHz4.7 GHz
Boost clock speed4.9 GHz5.2 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)80 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)96 MB (shared)
Chip lithography6 nm4 nm
Die size208 mm270.6 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data8,315 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D 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 configuration11
SocketFP7AM5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt120 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsPRO, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEno data
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon 680M ( - 2400 MHz)AMD Radeon Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D.

PCIe version4.05.0
PCI Express lanes2024

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 9 PRO 6950HS 14.29
Ryzen 7 9800X3D 25.27
+76.8%

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 9 PRO 6950HS 22697
Ryzen 7 9800X3D 40145
+76.9%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS 7664
Ryzen 7 9800X3D 16637
+117%

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS 5516
Ryzen 7 9800X3D 8484
+53.8%

7-Zip

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS 49474
Ryzen 7 9800X3D 90354
+82.6%

CrossMark Overall

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS 1345
Ryzen 7 9800X3D 2347
+74.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.29 25.27
Integrated graphics card 15.95 1.98
Recency 19 April 2022 7 November 2024
Chip lithography 6 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 120 Watt

Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS has 705.6% faster integrated GPU, and 242.9% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 9800X3D, on the other hand, has a 76.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 9800X3D is our recommended choice as it beats the Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS in performance tests.

Be aware that Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 9800X3D is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS and Ryzen 7 9800X3D, 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 9 PRO 6950HS
Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS
AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D
Ryzen 7 9800X3D

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.


5 2 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 270 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 9800X3D on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 PRO 6950HS or Ryzen 7 9800X3D, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.