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 7535HS review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£500PassMark multi-core score:17694N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.55 GHzCPU socket:FP7TDP (Thermal design power):?

AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.0/10

Overall score

Score
7.0/ 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
Score components

40%

6.2

Technical score

25%

7.6

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–²Better than 58% of processors
7.2

Value for money

Value for money
7.2/ 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
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

7.9

Price

â–¼Worse than 60%
6.2

Technical score

Technical score
6.2/ 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
Score components

60%

5.7

Performance

18%

6.2

Architecture

10%

7.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.4

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

7.6

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 56%
7.6

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.6/ 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

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
2 video reviews, each 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–²Better than 50%
?

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~ £500
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS

Technical score
Technical score
6.2/ 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
Score components:

60%

5.7

Performance

18%

6.2

Architecture

10%

7.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.4

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

7.6

Integrated graphics

6.2
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.2/ 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
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

7.9

Price

7.2
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
FP7
This processor uses the FP7 CPU socket, which is older than that of 50.4% 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, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 69.3% of processors and equal to that of 7.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 47.7% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
12
This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.55 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.55 GHz which is higher than that of 59.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
6x 3.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 6x3.3 GHz which is higher than that of 63.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
17,694
This processor scores 17,694 in PassMark, which is higher than 63.6% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
6 nm
This processor uses a 6 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 81% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 6 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 6 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 80.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
L3 cache
16 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 16 MB which is larger than that of 62% of processors and equal to that of 12.6% of processors.
L2 cache
3 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
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
DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR5, which is newer than that of 64.2% of processors and equal to that of 12.8% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 6,400 MHz, which is higher than that of 82.6% of processors and equal to 8% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5-6400 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5-6400 MHz, which is higher than that of 83.6% of processors and equal to 2.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 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 660M
This processor uses the Radeon 660M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 90.8% of processors and equal to that in 0.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
6
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
400 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 400 MHz which is higher than that of 68.4% of processors and equal to that of 8.3% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 57.2% of processors and equal to 9.1% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
?
Base power (PL1)
?
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 35-54 W
Show more

AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake).
    Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake
  • 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
  • 54.3% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (17,694 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    17,694 vs 11,469
  • 44.3% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2.7 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2.67 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 2x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 50% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (6 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    6 nm vs 12 nm
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    16 usable lanes
    20 vs 16
  • 13.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.6/ 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

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    2 video reviews, each 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.
    7.6 vs 6.7
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    January 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 54.3% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (17,694 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    17,694 vs 11,469
  • 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
  • 21.5% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,107 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,107 vs 2,558
  • 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
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (6x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    6x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 14.7% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,760 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,760 vs 1,535
  • 3.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.55 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 11.6% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (547 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    547 vs 490
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake).
    Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake
  • 44.3% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2.7 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2.67 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 50% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (6 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    6 nm vs 12 nm
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 6 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 6 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 77.8% larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (16 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    16 MB vs 9 MB
  • 2x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    16 usable lanes
    20 vs 16
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 63.8% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5-6,400 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Radeon 660M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Radeon 660M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 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 lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 66.2% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,760 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,760 vs 5,209
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 2x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is more expensive than the average processor (£500 vs £250).
    £500 vs £250
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 17.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (208 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    208 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 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
  • 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
  • 2x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is more expensive than the average processor (£500 vs £250).
    £500 vs £250
  • 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
  • 66.2% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,760 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,760 vs 5,209
  • 17.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (208 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    208 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 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 lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

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

9.0
Shiv Tech Smart
≈ estimated
19/01/2025
Hands-on review · benchmarks, gaming and battery tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS offers strong performance for the money, making it an easy pick for students and coders.
8.0
Rarity
≈ estimated
26/04/2024
Ownership review · three days of daily use
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is almost fine overall, except for battery life, which lasts only 2 to 2.5 hours in heavy editing.
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Overview video
Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio, often cited as a top value choice for budget gaming and student laptops
  • Strong gaming performance, especially when paired with a dedicated GPU, handling modern titles efficiently
  • Capable multi-tasking and daily productivity performance thanks to its 6-core/12-thread architecture
  • Improved power efficiency and battery management compared to older 'H' series or 'U' series processors
  • Integrated Radeon 660M graphics are reliable for light gaming and smooth 4K video playback
  • Supports modern DDR5 memory and PCIe 4.0 for faster overall system responsiveness

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS

  • Tends to run hot during graphically demanding tasks or heavy sustained workloads
  • Locked multiplier prevents users from overclocking for additional performance gains
  • Integrated graphics (Radeon 660M) are significantly weaker than higher-tier models like the Radeon 680M
  • Performance can be noticeably lower than competing Intel i5/i7 chips in heavy multi-core rendering benchmarks
  • Single-channel RAM configurations in some budget laptops can bottleneck the CPU's potential

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is a high-performance laptop processor from the Rembrandt Refresh family, featuring 6 cores and 12 threads built on the 6nm Zen 3+ architecture. It operates at a base clock of 3.3 GHz with a boost frequency of up to 4.55 GHz and includes 16MB of L3 cache alongside integrated Radeon 660M graphics. Main pros include support for modern standards like DDR5-4800 or LPDDR5-6400 memory, PCIe 4.0, and USB 4, while offering strong power efficiency with a configurable TDP of 35-54W. However, notable cons include its status as a refresh of the previous generation with minimal architectural changes, and the integrated 660M GPU is significantly slower than the 680M found in higher-tier Ryzen 7 models.

Compare AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS 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 7535HS and other processors

No results found