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 7 4700U review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£220PassMark multi-core score:13137N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.1 GHzCPU socket:FP6TDP (Thermal design power):15 W

AMD Ryzen 7 4700U Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 15 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 56% of models
Score components

40%

5.5

Technical score

25%

8.4

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

▲Better than 56% of processors
7.6

Value for money

Value for money
7.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 65% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

▲Better than 65%
5.5

Technical score

Technical score
5.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components

60%

4.9

Performance

18%

5.6

Architecture

10%

5.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.0

Platform

1%

7.3

Integrated graphics

▼Worse than 54%
8.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.4/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 89% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

9.0

Popularity

Grades by review (15)
5 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 10 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.
▲Better than 89%
?

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~ £220
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 7 4700U

Based on 4 · 11

Reviewers praise its strong all-round performance, are split on graphics and gaming, and dislike the limited memory and storage.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 7 4700U

Technical score
Technical score
5.5/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Score components:

60%

4.9

Performance

18%

5.6

Architecture

10%

5.8

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.7

Power & Thermal

4%

8.0

Platform

1%

7.3

Integrated graphics

5.5
Reviews score
8.4
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.6/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 65% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

9.4

Price

7.6
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, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 85.3% of processors and equal to that of 6% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
8
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 33.4% of processors and equal to 18.8% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.1 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.1 GHz which is lower than that of 58.7% of processors and equal to that of 2.8% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.0 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.0 GHz which is higher than that of 56.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
13,137
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 13,137 in PassMark, which is higher than 53.8% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
4 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L1 cache
512 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 512 KB which is larger than that of 62.8% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% 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
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Radeon Vega 7
Integrated GPU model
Radeon Vega 7
This processor uses the Radeon Vega 7 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 71% of processors and equal to that in 2% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
7
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 7 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 81.1% of processors and equal to 2.4% 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
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
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
15 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 15 W which is lower than that of 79.2% of processors and equal to that of 15.1% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
15 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 15 W which is lower than that of 78.3% of processors and equal to that of 15.6% 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.
Show more

AMD Ryzen 7 4700U vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 25.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 89% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    9.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    5 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 10 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.
    8.4 vs 6.7
  • 66.7% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Renoir vs Kaby Lake).
    Renoir vs Kaby Lake
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • 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
  • 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
  • 2.11x faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (718.8 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    718.8 vs 340.075
  • 25.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 89% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    9.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (15)
    5 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 5 estimated from the review. 10 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.
    8.4 vs 6.7
  • 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, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V 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, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 4 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (8 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    8 vs 4
  • 2 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • 2.11x faster classroom rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (718.8 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    718.8 vs 340.075
  • 14.5% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (13,137 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    13,137 vs 11,469
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x2.0 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
  • 33.3% larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (512 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    512 KB vs 384 KB
  • 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
  • 66.7% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 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
  • 66.7% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 45.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Secure Boot vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Secure Boot vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 6.8% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 11.3% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,362 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,362 vs 1,535
  • 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
  • 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)
  • 13.6% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (2,424 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    2,424 vs 2,804.5
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Secure Boot vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Secure Boot vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 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
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 6.8% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (4.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.1 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 11.3% lower single-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,362 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,362 vs 1,535
  • 13.6% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (2,424 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    2,424 vs 2,804.5
  • 5.3% lower Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a lower Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (464 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    464 vs 490
  • 8 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (20 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    20 vs 28
  • 45.9% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 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)
  • 70.8% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (7 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    7 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
Yash “the_thecnical” Sanghvi
≈ estimated
20/01/2021
Hands-on review · performance, battery and heat
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U offers good performance, battery life and a light build for work, but skip it for gaming.
9.5
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
15/09/2020
Benchmark review · CPU and gaming tests against Ryzen 5 4500U
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is an excellent buy right now, though supply is limited and Tiger Lake may change the picture.
9.0
W2Best Tech
≈ estimated
18/08/2020
Long-term test · one month of daily use
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is the most interesting laptop of 2020, balancing portability, ports, performance and price.
5.0
W2Best Tech
≈ estimated
22/07/2020
Hands-on review · one week of use, benchmarks, gaming
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U offers strong performance and gaming for its size, but the broken webcam means it will probably be sent back.
9.5
Solid State Tech
≈ estimated
21/06/2020
Benchmark test · comparison with the previous generation
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U roughly doubles the multi-threaded performance of the previous laptop chip, with strong single-threaded gains.
6.0
TechTablets
≈ estimated
21/06/2020
Gaming benchmarks · laptop tests and thermals
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is semi-playable in GTA V at 1080p low, and slow RAM holds it back.
8.0
Mike5GSR
≈ estimated
07/06/2020
Benchmark test · Apex Legends gaming
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U delivers good gaming performance in Apex Legends, but the highest settings need lowering to keep frame rates steady.
9.0
ShopeenBest
≈ estimated
19/05/2020
Hands-on review · benchmarks, display and battery
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U offers good value for the price with a powerful CPU, but the dim screen and webcam hold it back.
8.0
Muaath Tech
≈ estimated
07/11/2020
Hands-on test · PS2 emulation and battery life
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 7 4700U delivers smooth 1080p performance, but the claimed 20-hour battery figure is unverified and needs more testing.
Shop video
Hands-on video, no verdict
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
pcworld.com
≈ estimated
30/04/2020
Lab test · Laptop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is a strong 8-core laptop chip that beats Intel's 10th-gen U-series in most workloads, though battery life in the Acer Swift 3 was only average.
9.0
techspot.com
≈ estimated
25/10/2020
Benchmark review · Laptop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is a strong upgrade over Ryzen 5 4500U and Intel laptop chips for multi-threaded work, though it sometimes trails the 6-core Ryzen 5 4650U.
8.0
phoronix.com
≈ estimated
12/05/2020
Linux first look · Laptop test
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 4700U works well on Linux in the Lenovo IdeaPad 5, but graphics needed a newer kernel than Ubuntu 20.04 ships with.
9.0
pcworld.com
≈ estimated
30/04/2020
Lab test · Laptop processor
Verdict
The Ryzen 7 4700U is a fast laptop chip for heavy multi-core work and capable Radeon graphics, but the lack of Hyper-Threading costs it in some rendering tests.
9.0
notebooks-und-mobiles.de
≈ estimated
30/05/2020
Benchmark test · Laptop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is an eight-core laptop chip that beats Intel's 10th-gen rivals under sustained load, and its Radeon graphics rank near the top of integrated graphics.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 7 4700U

  • Exceptional multi-core performance for a thin-and-light laptop CPU, often competing with higher-wattage Intel H-series chips.
  • Integrated Radeon Vega 7 graphics offer a smooth experience for light gaming and eSports titles at 1080p.
  • High power efficiency due to the 7nm architecture, leading to solid battery life in well-optimized laptop designs.
  • Excellent value for money, providing 8 physical cores in budget-friendly laptop categories.
  • Fast video encoding and productivity performance (e.g., Handbrake, Excel) compared to Intel competitors of the same era.

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 4700U

  • Lack of Simultaneous Multi-Threading (SMT), meaning it has only 8 threads, which can limit performance in specific multi-threaded workloads compared to the Ryzen 7 4800U.
  • Integrated graphics struggle with modern AAA titles, requiring significant drops in resolution and settings.
  • Performance is highly dependent on the laptop's specific thermal design and power limits (can range from 10W to 25W).
  • Occasional software/driver issues reported in specific applications compared to more established Intel ecosystems at launch.
  • Single-core performance is strong but can be outperformed by newer generation Intel chips in lightly threaded tasks.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 4700U is a high-performance 7nm mobile processor based on the Zen 2 (Renoir) architecture, featuring 8 physical cores and 8 threads with a base clock of 2.0 GHz and a boost up to 4.1 GHz. Designed for thin-and-light laptops, it integrates Radeon RX Vega 7 graphics and supports high-speed DDR4-3200 or LPDDR4-4266 memory within a versatile 15W default TDP (configurable from 10W to 25W). Its main advantages include exceptional multi-threaded efficiency for productivity tasks like programming and video editing, alongside strong integrated graphics that handle light gaming and 4K media playback with ease. However, its primary drawbacks are the lack of Simultaneous Multithreading (SMT), which limits it to only 8 total threads compared to other Ryzen 7 models, and its potential for thermal throttling in laptops with inadequate cooling solutions.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 4700U 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 7 4700U and other processors

No results found