OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£970PassMark multi-core score:14295N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.0 GHzCPU socket:FP6TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.3/10

Overall score

Score
6.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
Score components

40%

5.8

Technical score

25%

5.8

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 62% of processors
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

5.4

Price

â–¼Worse than 95%
5.8

Technical score

Technical score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 50% of models
Score components

60%

5.4

Performance

18%

5.5

Architecture

10%

6.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

7.3

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 50%
5.8

Reviews score

Reviews score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models

5.8

Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 70%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £970
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS

Technical score
Technical score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 50% of models
Score components:

60%

5.4

Performance

18%

5.5

Architecture

10%

6.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

7.3

Integrated graphics

5.8
Reviews score
5.8
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

70%

6.3

Overall score

30%

5.4

Price

6.1
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FP6
This processor uses the FP6 CPU socket, which is older than that of 54.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2 instruction sets, which is broader support than 91.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 47.7% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4 GHz which is lower than that of 62.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.8% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 3.0 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x3.0 GHz which is higher than that of 59.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
14,295
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 14,295 in PassMark, which is higher than 57% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 55.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L3 cache
8 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 8 MB which is smaller than that of 50.7% of processors and equal to that of 11.5% of processors.
L2 cache
3 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 3 MB which is larger than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
L1 cache
384 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 384 KB which is larger than that of 44% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/LPDDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4/LPDDR4, which is newer than that of 58.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
4,266 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,266 MHz, which is higher than that of 59.6% of processors and equal to 2.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-4266 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR4-4266 MHz, which is higher than that of 57.2% of processors and equal to 2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon Vega 6
This processor uses the Radeon Vega 6 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 68.8% of processors and equal to that in 2.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
6
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 6 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 83.5% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
?
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.2% of processors and equal to that of 14% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.3% of processors and equal to that of 14.1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 35 W
Show more

AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Renoir vs Kaby Lake).
    Renoir vs Kaby Lake
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    7 nm vs 12 nm
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 5 °C higher temperature limit
    This processor has a higher temperature limit than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C
  • 24.6% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (14,295 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    14,295 vs 11,469
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA).
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Broader instruction support
    This processor supports a broader instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 2 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    6 vs 4
  • 4 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    12 vs 8
  • 24.6% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (14,295 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    14,295 vs 11,469
  • 23.1% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (6,414 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    6,414 vs 5,209
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x3.0 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Renoir vs Kaby Lake).
    Renoir vs Kaby Lake
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (7 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    7 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 7 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4
  • 45.6% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (68.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    68.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 33.3% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4,266 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    4,266 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 5 °C higher temperature limit
    This processor has a higher temperature limit than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C
  • 22.2% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 W
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 28.1% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.33 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 13.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models

    5.8

    Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.8 vs 6.7
  • 15.1% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,303 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,303 vs 1,535
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 45.2% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (186.4 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    186.4 vs 340.075
  • 3.88x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS is more expensive than the average processor (£970 vs £250).
    £970 vs £250
  • 20.3% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS has worse value for money than the average processor (6.05 vs 7.3).
    6.05 vs 7.29
  • 13.4% lower review score
    Reviews score
    5.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models

    5.8

    Mark 7.2 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    5.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (1)
    1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    5.8 vs 6.7
  • 3.88x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS is more expensive than the average processor (£970 vs £250).
    £970 vs £250
  • 20.3% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS has worse value for money than the average processor (6.05 vs 7.3).
    6.05 vs 7.29
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 9.1% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 15.1% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,303 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,303 vs 1,535
  • 45.2% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (186.4 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    186.4 vs 340.075
  • 6.5% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,391 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    2,391 vs 2,558
  • 28.1% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.33 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 75% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (6 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    6 vs 24
  • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0
Phani Rama Chandra
≈ estimated
26/10/2020
Hands-on review · one month of daily use
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS is recommended as good value, especially in its base version, though heat is the main drawback.
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS

  • Excellent multi-threaded performance, often beating higher-tier Intel Core i7 and even some i9 processors of its generation.
  • High power efficiency due to the 7nm Zen 2 architecture, providing a great balance between performance and battery life for laptops.
  • Strong integrated Radeon Vega 6 graphics, capable of handling light gaming and productivity tasks without a dedicated GPU.
  • Excellent value for money, frequently described as 'punching above its weight' for an entry-to-mid-range chip.
  • Highly capable in productivity workloads such as video editing, rendering, and code compilation.

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS

  • Single-core performance, while improved over previous generations, can still lag behind high-clocked Intel competitors in specific burst tasks.
  • Locked multiplier prevents easy overclocking, limiting performance gains for enthusiasts.
  • Highly dependent on fast RAM (dual-channel) to reach its full performance potential; single-channel memory can significantly 'cripple' results.
  • Considered 'outdated' by modern standards (Zen 2 architecture), with significantly better performance available in newer Ryzen 5000 and 6000 series.
  • The 'HS' variant has a lower 35W TDP compared to the 45W 'H' model, which can lead to slightly lower sustained performance in heavy workloads.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS is a high-performance mobile processor based on the 7nm Zen 2 'Renoir' architecture, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads with a base clock of 3.0 GHz and a boost frequency up to 4.0 GHz. Designed for slim gaming laptops, it operates at a power-efficient 35W TDP and includes an integrated Radeon RX Vega 6 GPU with 6 compute units clocked at 1500 MHz, alongside support for dual-channel DDR4-3200 or LPDDR4-4266 RAM and 8MB of L3 cache. Its main strengths include exceptional multi-core efficiency for its power envelope, providing performance that often rivals higher-wattage Intel Core i7 counterparts in productivity and content creation tasks. However, it lacks an unlocked multiplier for easy overclocking, and its overall performance can be inconsistent depending on the specific laptop's cooling solution and power limits.

Compare AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Ryzen 5 4600HS and other processors

No results found