OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£1,100PassMark benchmark result:19444N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:FP6TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.4

Overall score

Score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 62% of models
Score components

90%

6.4

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–²Better than 62% of processors
6.4

Technical score

Technical score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 63% of models
Score components

60%

6.3

Performance

18%

6.1

Cache & Architecture

10%

6.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated Graphics

â–²Better than 63% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ £1,100

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 7 5800HS

Technical score
Technical score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 63% of models
Score components:

60%

6.3

Performance

18%

6.1

Cache & Architecture

10%

6.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated Graphics

6.4
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
5.9/ 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 80% of models
Score components:

60%

6.4

Overall score

40%

4.7

Price

5.9
Brand name
AMD
Processor type
mobile
Processor type
mobile
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 7.3% of processors and equal to that of 48.6% of processors.
CPU socket
FP6
CPU socket
FP6
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor uses the FP6 CPU socket, which is older than that of 52.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450
Chipset
X570, B550, A520, X470, B450
â–² Better than 68% of models
This processor supports X570, B550, A520, X470, B450 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 67.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
N. of physical cores
8
â–² Better than 63% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 63.4% of processors and equal to 13.6% of processors.
CPU threads
16
CPU threads
16
â–² Better than 71% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 71% of processors and equal to 14% of processors.
Threads per core
2
Threads per core
2
â–² Better than 30% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
â–² Better than 51% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 51.2% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.8 GHz
CPU base clock speed
8x 2.8 GHz
â–² Better than 73% of models
This processor has a base clock of 8x2.8 GHz which is higher than that of 72.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Semiconductor size
7 nm
â–² Better than 72% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 71.5% of processors and equal to that of 10.9% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
â–² Better than 57% of models
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 56.7% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
L3 cache
16 MB
L3 cache
16 MB
â–² Better than 64% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 16 MB which is larger than that of 64.2% of processors and equal to that of 12.7% of processors.
L2 cache
4 MB
L2 cache
4 MB
â–² Better than 55% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 55.4% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
L1 cache
512 KB
L1 cache
512 KB
â–² Better than 63% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 512 KB which is larger than that of 63.5% of processors and equal to that of 9.5% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/LPDDR4
DDR memory version
DDR4/LPDDR4
â–² Better than 60% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4/LPDDR4, which is newer than that of 60.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
4,266 MHz
Maximum memory speed
4,266 MHz
â–² Better than 62% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,266 MHz, which is higher than that of 61.5% of processors and equal to 2.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-4266 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-4266 MHz
â–² Better than 59% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR4-4266 MHz, which is higher than that of 58.6% of processors and equal to 2.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 28.4% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon Vega 8
Integrated GPU model
Radeon Vega 8
â–² Better than 73% of models
This processor uses the Radeon Vega 8 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 72.9% of processors and equal to that in 3.4% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
8
Integrated GPU execution units
8
â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 8 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 74% of processors and equal to 7.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 58.1% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
â–² Better than 56% of models
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 56.2% of processors and equal to 9.5% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 51.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
Base power (PL1)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 15% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
yes
Configurable TDP
yes
â–² Better than 47% of models
This processor supports configurable TDP. 47.3% of processors support configurable TDP.
cTDP: 35-54 W
Show more

AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 83.9% higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    19,444
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (19,444 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    19,444 vs 10,572.5
  • 8 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    16
    â–² Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 68.8% better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    4,710
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,710 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,710 vs 2,791
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Cezanne
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cezanne vs Kaby Lake).
    Cezanne vs Kaby Lake
  • 47.2% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    7,109
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,109 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,109 vs 4,829
  • 32.2% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1944
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1944 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,944 vs 1,471
  • 2 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    8
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    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
    Semiconductor size
    7 nm
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
  • Broader instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V
    ★ Better than 94% of models
    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, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, CLMUL, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 83.9% higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    19,444
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (19,444 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    19,444 vs 10,572.5
  • 8 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    16
    â–² Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 68.8% better multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    4,710
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (4,710 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    4,710 vs 2,791
  • 47.2% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    7,109
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,109 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,109 vs 4,829
  • 32.2% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1944
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1944 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,944 vs 1,471
  • 2 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    8
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    8 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    8 x 2.8 GHz
    â–² Better than 73% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x2.8 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    8x2.8 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 18.6% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    2,966
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (2,966 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    2,966 vs 2,500
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Cezanne
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cezanne vs Kaby Lake).
    Cezanne vs Kaby Lake
  • 41.7% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    7 nm
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
    Foundry
    TSMC 7 nm
    â–² Better than 57% of models
    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
  • 2x larger L3 cache
    L3 cache
    16 MB
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (16 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    16 MB vs 8 MB
  • 16.7% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    2 MB/core
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 60% larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    4 MB
    â–² Better than 55% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (4 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    4 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 2.16x more transistors
    N. of transistors
    10.7 billion
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <1.303 billion – >25 billion
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (10.7 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    10.7 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 33.3% larger L1 cache
    L1 cache
    512 KB
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    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
  • 49.1% higher memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    68.3 GB/s
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (68.3 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    68.3 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/LPDDR4
    â–² Better than 60% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/LPDDR4 vs DDR4
  • 45.4% higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    4,266 MHz
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4266 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    4,266 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    Maximum supported displays
    4
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <1 – >6
    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 TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    105 °C
    â–² Better than 84% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a higher TJ Max than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C
  • 22.2% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    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
  • 4.4x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS is more expensive than the average processor (£1,100 vs £250).
    £1,100 vs £250
  • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    105 °C
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    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
  • 10.9% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has worse value for money than the average processor (5.92 vs 6.6).
    5.92 vs 6.56
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    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)).
    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)
  • 66.7% fewer GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    8
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (8 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    8 vs 24
  • Older TPM support
    TPM type
    fTPM 2.0
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 1.7% larger die size
    Die size
    180 mm²
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (180 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    180 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 4.4x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS is more expensive than the average processor (£1,100 vs £250).
    £1,100 vs £250
  • 10.9% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS has worse value for money than the average processor (5.92 vs 6.6).
    5.92 vs 6.56
  • Older TPM support
    TPM type
    fTPM 2.0
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 1.7% larger die size
    Die size
    180 mm²
    â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (180 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    180 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 66.7% fewer GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    8
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (8 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    8 vs 24
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    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)).
    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)
  • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    105 °C
    â–¼ Worse than 84% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    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

Not graded
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

N
notebookcheck.nl
06/05/2022
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 6800HS offers
(Translated)Show original
I
inthegame.nl
12/01/2022
Summary of the review
God of War Review (PC: Ryzen 7, GTX 1650)
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS

  • Exceptional multi-core performance for heavy workloads like video editing, rendering, and programming
  • High power efficiency with a 35W TDP, contributing to better battery life compared to the 45W H-series
  • Strong single-core performance improvements over previous generations (Zen 3 architecture)
  • Thermal efficiency allows it to run cooler in thin and light performance laptops
  • Reliable for virtualization and multitasking with 8 cores and 16 threads

What we don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS

  • Lower base and boost clock speeds compared to the standard Ryzen 7 5800H variant
  • Integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics are becoming outdated for modern high-end gaming
  • Lacks support for AVX-512 and PCIe Gen 4, which some newer Intel competitors offer
  • Performance can be significantly handicapped if paired with single-channel memory
  • Single-core speeds may still lag slightly behind specific top-tier Intel Tiger Lake processors

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS is a high-performance, 35W TDP mobile processor based on the Zen 3 'Cezanne' architecture, featuring 8 cores and 16 threads with a 2.8 GHz base clock and up to 4.4 GHz boost. Manufactured on a 7nm process, it includes 16 MB of L3 cache, a Radeon RX Vega 8 integrated GPU, and support for dual-channel DDR4-3200 or LPDDR4-4266 memory. Its main pros include exceptional multi-core performance for productivity, improved IPC over previous generations, and high power efficiency tailored for slim gaming laptops. Notable cons include its lack of PCIe 4.0 support for the latest high-speed NVMe SSDs and a soldered design that prevents future CPU upgrades.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 5800HS 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 5800HS and other processors

No results found