CPU Comparison: AMD Ryzen 7 7840S vs Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz

Key Findings

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840S leads in single-threaded performance by up to 54.6%
In multi-threaded workloads, the AMD Ryzen 7 7840S shows superior performance with a 184.5% advantage
The AMD Ryzen 7 7840S has the highest core count with 8 cores

Performance Rankings & Market Position

AMD Ryzen 7 7840S

Laptop

Release Date

Q3 2023

Market Position

494th fastest in multithreading

4890 CPUs219th fastest in single threading

4890 CPUs72nd fastest in

1434 Laptop CPUs

Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz

Laptop

Release Date

Q1 2018

Market Position

1320th fastest in multithreading

4890 CPUs969th fastest in single threading

4890 CPUs306th fastest in

1434 Laptop CPUs

Performance

Single-Thread Performance

7840S

3,685

3.10GHz

2,384

Multi-Thread Performance

7840S

24,309

3.10GHz

8,543

Specifications: AMD Ryzen 7 7840S vs Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz

💻CPU Model

AMD Ryzen 7 7840S

7840S

Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz

3.10GHz

🔄Other Names

AMD Ryzen 7 7840S with Radeon 780M Graphics

7840S

Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-8809G CPU @ 3.10GHz, Intel Core i7-8809G CPU @ 3.10GHz

3.10GHz

⚡Base Clock

3.8 GHz

7840S

3.1 GHz

3.10GHz

🚀Turbo Clock

5.1 GHz

7840S

4.2 GHz

3.10GHz

💻Cores/Threads

8 Threads: 16

7840S

4 Threads: 8

3.10GHz

🔌Socket

FP7 FP7r2 FP8

7840S

BGA2270

3.10GHz

⚡TDP

54 W

7840S

100 W

3.10GHz

💾Cache

L1 Instruction Cache: 8 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 8 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 8 x 1024 KBL3 Cache: 16 MB

7840S

L1 Instruction Cache: 4 x 32 KBL1 Data Cache: 4 x 32 KBL2 Cache: 4 x 256 KBL3 Cache: 8 MB

3.10GHz

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840S and Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz compete in the Laptop segment. The AMD Ryzen 7 7840S shows superior single-thread performance, making it better for tasks like gaming and light workloads.

For multi-threaded applications, the Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz takes the lead, despite having the same core count.

Power consumption differs significantly, with the Intel Core i7-8809G @ 3.10GHz drawing more power under load (100W vs 54W). This may impact system thermal design and power supply requirements.