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 7735H Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£490PassMark benchmark result:23300N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.75 GHzCPU socket:FP7TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

AMD Ryzen 7 7735H Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.2

Overall score

Score
7.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 74% of models
Score components

90%

7.2

Technical score

10%

?

User score

▲Better than 74% of processors
7.2

Technical score

Technical score
7.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 74% of models
Score components

60%

7.3

Performance

18%

6.4

Cache & Architecture

10%

7.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated Graphics

▲Better than 74% 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ £490

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 7735H

Technical score
Technical score
7.2/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 74% of models
Score components:

60%

7.3

Performance

18%

6.4

Cache & Architecture

10%

7.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated Graphics

7.2
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
AMD Ryzen 7 7735H 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
7.4/ 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 72% of models
Score components:

60%

7.2

Overall score

40%

7.9

Price

7.4
Brand name
AMD
Processor type
mobile
Processor type
mobile
▼ 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
FP7
CPU socket
FP7
▼ Worse than 48% of models
This processor uses the FP7 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 47.4% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
▲ 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
▲ 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
▲ 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
▲ 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
4.75 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.75 GHz
▲ Better than 71% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.75 GHz which is higher than that of 70.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.2 GHz
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.2 GHz
▲ Better than 77% of models
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.2 GHz which is higher than that of 76.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
6 nm
Semiconductor size
6 nm
▲ Better than 83% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 6 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 82.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 6 nm
Foundry
TSMC 6 nm
▲ Better than 81% of models
This processor is built on the TSMC 6 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 81.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.6% of processors.
L3 cache
16 MB
L3 cache
16 MB
▲ 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
▲ 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
▲ 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
DDR5/LPDDR5
DDR memory version
DDR5/LPDDR5
★ Better than 92% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR5/LPDDR5, which is newer than that of 91.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
▲ Better than 84% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 6,400 MHz, which is higher than that of 83.9% of processors and equal to 8.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
?
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
▼ 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
▲ Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 680M
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 680M
★ Better than 92% of models
This processor uses the Radeon 680M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 91.9% of processors and equal to that in 1.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
12
Integrated GPU execution units
12
▼ Worse than 63% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 12 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 62.7% of processors and equal to 9.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
400 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
400 MHz
▲ Better than 69% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 400 MHz which is higher than that of 68.7% of processors and equal to that of 7.9% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode)
▲ Better than 82% of models
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 81.6% of processors and equal to 3.2% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
▲ 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
▲ 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
▲ 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 7735H vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.2x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    23,300
    ▲ Better than 79% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (23,300 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    23,300 vs 10,572.5
  • 2.13x higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    10,295
    ▲ Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,295 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,295 vs 4,829
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Rembrandt R
    ▲ Better than 85% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake).
    Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake
  • 3.16x higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    1,546
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (1,546 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    1,546 vs 489
  • 8 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    16
    ▲ 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
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR5/LPDDR5
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • 2.18x higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    6,400 MHz
    ▲ Better than 84% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6400 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • 29.3% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,232
    ▲ Better than 69% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,232 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,232 vs 2,500
  • Broader instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V
    ▲ Better than 85% 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, 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, BMI1, BMI2, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • 3 years newer release date
    Release date
    2023
    ▲ Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    April 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Memory Guard, Pluton
    ▼ Worse than 51% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Memory Guard, Pluton vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Memory Guard, Pluton vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • 2.2x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    23,300
    ▲ Better than 79% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (23,300 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    23,300 vs 10,572.5
  • 2.13x higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    10,295
    ▲ Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (10,295 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    10,295 vs 4,829
  • 3.16x higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    1,546
    ★ Better than 97% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (1,546 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    1,546 vs 489
  • 8 more CPU threads
    CPU threads
    16
    ▲ 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
  • 29.3% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,232
    ▲ Better than 69% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,232 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,232 vs 2,500
  • 37% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    2016
    ▲ Better than 68% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2016 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,016 vs 1,471
  • 10.5% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.75 GHz
    ▲ Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.8 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    4.75 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    8 x 3.2 GHz
    ▲ Better than 77% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.2 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    8x3.2 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 2 more CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    8
    ▲ 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
  • 46.1% faster classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    488
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (488 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    488 vs 334.1
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Rembrandt R
    ▲ Better than 85% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake).
    Rembrandt R vs Kaby Lake
  • 50% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    6 nm
    ▲ Better than 83% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    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
    Foundry
    TSMC 6 nm
    ▲ Better than 81% of models
    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
  • 2x larger L3 cache
    L3 cache
    16 MB
    ▲ 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
    ▲ 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
    ▲ 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
  • 33.3% larger L1 cache
    L1 cache
    512 KB
    ▲ 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
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR5/LPDDR5
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • 2.18x higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    6,400 MHz
    ▲ Better than 84% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6400 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Newer PCIe version
    PCIe version
    4.0
    ▲ Better than 62% of models
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    20
    ▲ Better than 58% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    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
  • 67.7% higher memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    76.8 GB/s
    ▲ Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    ▲ Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • Better integrated GPU
    Integrated GPU model
    Radeon 680M
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Radeon 680M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Radeon 680M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 1 more supported displays
    Maximum supported displays
    4
    ▲ 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 lower CPU temperature
    CPU temperature
    95 °C
    ▲ Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    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
  • 22.2% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    ▲ 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
  • 5 °C lower TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    95 °C
    ▼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 96% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 7735H is more expensive than the average processor (£490 vs £250).
    £490 vs £250
  • 18.6% larger die size
    Die size
    210 mm²
    ▼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (210 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    210 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Older TPM support
    TPM type
    fTPM 2.0
    ▼ 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
  • 50% fewer GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    12
    ▼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (12 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    12 vs 24
  • 96% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 7735H is more expensive than the average processor (£490 vs £250).
    £490 vs £250
  • Older TPM support
    TPM type
    fTPM 2.0
    ▼ 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
  • 18.6% larger die size
    Die size
    210 mm²
    ▼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (210 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    210 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 50% fewer GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    12
    ▼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (12 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    12 vs 24
  • 5 °C lower TJ Max
    Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
    95 °C
    ▼ Worse than 73% of models
    Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
    This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

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

Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

O
openbenchmarking.org
Q1 2023
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS - OpenBenchmarking.org
C
cpu.userbenchmark.com
March 2026 (Updated Daily)
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS - CPU UserBenchmarks
L
laptopmedia.com
01/01/2023
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 7735H - LaptopMedia
C
cpubenchmark.net
March 2026 (Updated Daily)
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 7735H - CPU Benchmarks and Gaming Tests
T
the-gadgeteer.com
06/10/2023
Summary of the review
ACEMAGIC AM20 AMD Ryzen™ 7 7735H Mini PC review
L
laptopmedia.com
30/01/2023
Summary of the review
Comparison: AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS vs. AMD Ryzen 7 5800H
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
31/01/2023
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS vs Intel Core i7-11800H – Tiger Lake in 2023? Why not?
(Translated)Show original
T
tomshardware.fr
02/05/2023
Summary of the review
Ryzen 7 7840HS and its Radeon 780M iGPU tested (including Ryzen 7 7735H benchmarks)
(Translated)Show original
H
hwlegend.tech
14/09/2025
Summary of the review
The best budget laptop?
(Translated)Show original
L
laptopmedia.com
Q1 2023
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 7735H | LaptopMedia
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.nl
29/02/2024
Summary of the review
Aoostar GOD77 Review: Mini PC with Lighting Effects and AMD Ryzen 7 7735HS in a Striking Cyberpunk Case
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about AMD Ryzen 7 7735H

  • Excellent value for money, often found in budget-friendly gaming laptops and mini PCs.
  • Strong multi-threaded performance due to 8 cores and 16 threads, making it great for multitasking and productivity.
  • The integrated Radeon 680M graphics are highly capable for light gaming and esports titles without a dedicated GPU.
  • Good energy efficiency for a H-series chip, leading to respectable battery life in optimized laptops.
  • Quiet operation in many mini PC and laptop configurations compared to higher-TDP alternatives.

What we don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 7735H

  • Significant thermal output; users report temperatures hitting 95-100°C under heavy boost or intensive tasks like video rendering.
  • Confusing branding as it uses the older Zen 3+ architecture rather than the newer Zen 4 architecture found in other 7000-series chips.
  • Limited performance gains over the previous generation (Ryzen 7 6800H), essentially acting as a minor clock-speed refresh.
  • The integrated GPU struggles with modern AAA games at 1080p high settings without the aid of a dedicated graphics card.
  • Single-core performance trails behind some comparable Intel 12th and 13th Gen Core i7 mobile processors.

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 7735H is an 8-core, 16-thread mobile processor based on the Zen 3+ 'Rembrandt Refresh' architecture, featuring a 3.2 GHz base clock and a boost frequency of up to 4.75 GHz. Manufactured on a 6nm process, it includes the integrated Radeon 680M GPU with 12 compute units and supports modern connectivity standards like PCIe 4.0, USB4, and high-speed DDR5-4800 or LPDDR5-6400 memory. Main advantages include exceptional integrated graphics performance for light gaming, high power efficiency suitable for thin notebooks, and robust multi-threaded performance for productivity. However, common drawbacks include a tendency to reach high operating temperatures (up to 95°C) under heavy loads and the fact that it is a minor refresh of the previous generation with only marginal speed improvements.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 7735H 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 7735H and other processors

No results found