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 8840HS Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£690PassMark benchmark result:24954N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:5.1 GHzCPU socket:FP7TDP (Thermal design power):28 W

AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.5

Overall score

Score
7.5/ 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 78% of models
Score components

90%

7.5

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–²Better than 78% of processors
7.5

Technical score

Technical score
7.5/ 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 78% of models
Score components

60%

7.3

Performance

18%

7.4

Cache & Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.7

Integrated Graphics

â–²Better than 78% 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~ £690

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 8840HS

Technical score
Technical score
7.5/ 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 78% of models
Score components:

60%

7.3

Performance

18%

7.4

Cache & Architecture

10%

8.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.7

Integrated Graphics

7.5
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 8840HS 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
7.3/ 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–² Better than 68% of models
Score components:

60%

7.5

Overall score

40%

6.9

Price

7.3
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
FP7
CPU socket
FP7
â–¼ 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
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
5.1 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
5.1 GHz
â–² Better than 86% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.1 GHz which is higher than that of 86.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.3 GHz
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.3 GHz
â–² Better than 79% of models
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.3 GHz which is higher than that of 78.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
4 nm
Semiconductor size
4 nm
â–² Better than 88% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 4 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 88.5% of processors and equal to that of 7.4% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 4 nm
Foundry
TSMC 4 nm
â–² Better than 87% of models
This processor is built on the TSMC 4 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 87% of processors and equal to that of 7.5% 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
8 MB
L2 cache
8 MB
â–² Better than 74% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 8 MB which is larger than that of 73.8% of processors and equal to that of 4.1% 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
DDR5/LPDDR5X
DDR memory version
DDR5/LPDDR5X
★ Better than 92% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR5/LPDDR5X, which is newer than that of 92.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
7,500 MHz
Maximum memory speed
7,500 MHz
★ Better than 93% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 7,500 MHz, which is higher than that of 93.3% of processors and equal to 3.8% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-7500 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-7500 MHz
★ Better than 94% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-7500 MHz, which is higher than that of 93.7% of processors and equal to 3.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
â–² Better than 89% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 256 GB of memory, which is more than 89.5% of processors and equal to 8.2% 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 780M
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 780M
★ Better than 96% of models
This processor uses the Radeon 780M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 95.9% of processors and equal to that in 1.9% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
12
Integrated GPU execution units
12
â–¼ 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
800 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
800 MHz
â–² Better than 87% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 800 MHz which is higher than that of 86.7% of processors and equal to that of 6.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode/encode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode/encode)
★ Better than 91% of models
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is broader support than 90.7% of processors and equal to 3.4% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
28 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
28 W
â–² Better than 67% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 28 W which is lower than that of 67.5% of processors and equal to that of 7% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
28 W
Base power (PL1)
28 W
â–² Better than 67% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 28 W which is lower than that of 67.2% of processors and equal to that of 7.2% 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.
Show more

AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.36x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    24,954
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (24,954 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    24,954 vs 10,572.5
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Hawk Point
    â–² Better than 88% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Hawk Point vs Kaby Lake).
    Hawk Point vs Kaby Lake
  • 86.9% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    9,025
    â–² Better than 73% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (9,025 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    9,025 vs 4,829
  • 44.2% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,605
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,605 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,605 vs 2,500
  • 18.6% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    5.1 GHz
    â–² Better than 86% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 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
  • 4x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    256 GB
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    256 GB vs 64 GB
  • 2.56x higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    7,500 MHz
    ★ Better than 93% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7500 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    7,500 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Memory Guard, Secure Processor, GMET, SME, TSME, Pluton
    ★ Better than 93% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Memory Guard, Secure Processor, GMET, SME, TSME, Pluton vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Memory Guard, Secure Processor, GMET, SME, TSME, Pluton vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • 3 years newer release date
    Release date
    2023
    â–² Better than 71% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    December 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 2.36x higher PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    24,954
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (24,954 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    24,954 vs 10,572.5
  • 86.9% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    9,025
    â–² Better than 73% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (9,025 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    9,025 vs 4,829
  • 18.6% higher boost clock
    CPU boost clock speed
    5.1 GHz
    â–² Better than 86% of models
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
    5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
  • 44.2% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,605
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,605 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,605 vs 2,500
  • 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
  • 40.6% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    2068
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2068 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,068 vs 1,471
  • Higher base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    8 x 3.3 GHz
    â–² Better than 79% of models
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    8x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 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
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Hawk Point
    â–² Better than 88% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Hawk Point vs Kaby Lake).
    Hawk Point vs Kaby Lake
  • 66.7% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    4 nm
    â–² Better than 88% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (4 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    4 nm vs 12 nm
  • 3.2x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    8 MB
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (8 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    8 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • More advanced foundry
    Foundry
    TSMC 4 nm
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 4 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 4 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    1 MB/core
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 5.05x more transistors
    N. of transistors
    25 billion
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <1.303 billion – >25 billion
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (25 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    25 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 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
  • 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
  • 2.56x higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    7,500 MHz
    ★ Better than 93% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7500 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    7,500 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • 4x more memory capacity
    Maximum memory capacity
    256 GB
    â–² Better than 89% of models
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    256 GB vs 64 GB
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR5/LPDDR5X
    ★ Better than 92% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4).
    DDR5/LPDDR5X vs DDR4
  • 95.6% higher memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    89.6 GB/s
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • Newer PCIe version
    PCIe version
    4.0
    â–² 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
    â–² 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.
    20 vs 16
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    LPDDR5X-7500 MHz
    ★ Better than 94% of models
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-7500 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-7500 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    Integrated GPU model
    Radeon 780M
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Radeon 780M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Radeon 780M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 2.29x higher GPU clock speed
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    800 MHz
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
    This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (800 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
    800 MHz vs 350 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
  • 37.8% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    28 W
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • 37.8% lower TDP
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    28 W
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (28 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    28 W vs 45 W
  • 51.2% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    163.11
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (163.1 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    163.11 vs 334.1
  • 2.76x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is more expensive than the average processor (£690 vs £250).
    £690 vs £250
  • 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
  • 50% fewer GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    12
    â–¼ 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
  • 2.76x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is more expensive than the average processor (£690 vs £250).
    £690 vs £250
  • 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
  • 51.2% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    163.11
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (163.1 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    163.11 vs 334.1
  • 50% fewer GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    12
    â–¼ 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

Video reviews

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

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

L
laptopmedia.com
Not specified
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS - LaptopMedia Benchmarks
L
laptopspirit.fr
22/10/2026
Summary of the review
Ryzen 7 8840HS - LaptopSpirit
(Translated)Show original
Z
zdnet.fr
18/03/2025
Summary of the review
HP Envy x360 Review: The 2-in-1 laptop that suits content creators and other pros
(Translated)Show original
L
lesnumeriques.com
15/04/2024
Summary of the review
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED (UM3406HA): Best Price - Les Numériques (Review and Benchmarks)
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.biz
23/05/2024
Summary of the review
HP Envy x360 2-in-1 16 Review: Ryzen 7 8840HS beats Core Ultra 7 155U
(Translated)Show original
Z
zdnet.fr
24/06/2024
Summary of the review
Dell Inspiron 14 2-in-1 Review: A Pro Laptop That Beats Lenovo and HP
(Translated)Show original
L
lesnumeriques.com
15/04/2024
Summary of the review
Asus Zenbook 14 OLED UM3406 Review: The ultraportable gets a makeover with Ryzen 8000
(Translated)Show original
T
tweakers.net
04/12/2025
Summary of the review
Laptop Best Buy Guide - Best Entry-Level Gaming Laptops (Ryzen 7 8840HS Test Results)
(Translated)Show original
T
tweakers.net
04/12/2025
Summary of the review
Laptop Best Buy Guide - Best entry-level gaming laptops (test notes on the 8840HS in budget models)
(Translated)Show original
N
notebookcheck.nl
27/03/2026
Summary of the review
AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 disappoints in first benchmarks (including HP Envy x360 8840HS test results)
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

What we like about AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS

  • Excellent integrated graphics performance with the Radeon 780M, capable of 1080p gaming on low-to-medium settings
  • High energy efficiency due to the 4nm TSMC manufacturing process, leading to long battery life in many laptop models
  • Strong multi-threaded performance (8 cores/16 threads) suitable for productivity, coding, and light content creation
  • Includes a dedicated Ryzen AI NPU, offering improved performance for AI-accelerated tasks in apps like Adobe and DaVinci Resolve
  • Generally runs cooler and is less prone to thermal throttling compared to some Intel competitors
  • Support for modern standards including DDR5-5600, LPDDR5x-7500, PCIe 4.0, and USB4

What we don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS

  • Minimal performance gain over the previous generation (Ryzen 7 7840HS), essentially acting as a rebadged version with AI updates
  • Multi-core performance under prolonged heavy loads (like long 3D renders) lags behind higher TDP (45W+) processors
  • Lack of hardware AV1 encoding support in the integrated GPU can be a drawback for high-end streamers
  • Real-world NPU software support is still developing, making the 'AI' features less useful for some current workflows
  • Lacks an unlocked multiplier, meaning it cannot be manually overclocked for additional performance
  • Performance is highly dependent on the laptop manufacturer's specific cooling solution and TDP limits

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS is a high-performance mobile processor from the Hawk Point family, featuring 8 Zen 4 cores and 16 threads with a base clock of 3.3 GHz and a boost up to 5.1 GHz. Built on a 4nm TSMC process, it includes 16 MB of L3 cache, a dedicated Ryzen AI NPU delivering up to 16 TOPS (39 TOPS total), and an integrated Radeon 780M GPU with 12 compute units. Main pros include exceptional energy efficiency within a 20-30W TDP range, strong multi-threaded performance, and a powerful integrated GPU capable of 1080p gaming. Cons include the lack of overclocking support, being a non-user-replaceable soldered chip, and potential performance variability depending on a laptop's specific cooling solution and power limits.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS 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 8840HS and other processors

No results found