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 PRO 5750GE review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£380PassMark multi-core score:21033N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.6 GHzCPU socket:AM4TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE
7.0/10

Overall score

Score
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

40%

6.6

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 61% of processors
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

â–²Better than 60%
6.6

Technical score

Technical score
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

5.9

Architecture

10%

7.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 63%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
  • amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
amd-ryzen-7-pro-5750ge
Where to buy
    N/A~ £380
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE

Technical score
Technical score
6.6/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

60%

6.5

Performance

18%

5.9

Architecture

10%

7.0

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

8.0

Integrated graphics

6.6
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

70%

7.0

Overall score

30%

8.5

Price

7.5
Processor type
desktop
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 54.7% of processors and equal to that of 39.5% of processors.
CPU socket
AM4
This processor uses the AM4 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 75.1% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
?
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
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
16
This processor offers 16 CPU threads, which is more than 69% of processors and equal to 14.6% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.6 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.6 GHz which is higher than that of 59.9% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 3.2 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.2 GHz which is higher than that of 75.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
21,033
This processor scores 21,033 in PassMark, which is higher than 71.9% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
7 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
16 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 16 MB which is larger than that of 62% of processors and equal to that of 12.6% of processors.
L2 cache
4 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
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
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,200 MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 49.8% of processors and equal to 8.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR4-3200 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR4-3200 MHz, which is higher than that of 46.1% of processors and equal to 9.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
3,200 MHz
This processor supports XMP/EXPO memory speeds up to 3,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 91.2% of processors and equal to 1.4% of processors.
Maximum memory capacity
128 GB
This processor supports up to 128 GB of memory, which is more than 59.3% of processors and equal to 22.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon Vega 8
This processor uses the Radeon Vega 8 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 73% of processors and equal to that in 3.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
8
This processor has 8 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 73.9% of processors and equal to 7.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
2000 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 2000 MHz which is higher than that of 98.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 57.2% of processors and equal to 9.1% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.2% of processors and equal to that of 14% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.3% of processors and equal to that of 14.1% 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.
cTDP: 35 W
Show more

AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE 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
  • 83.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,033 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,033 vs 11,469
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    16 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cezanne vs Kaby Lake).
    Cezanne vs Kaby Lake
  • 27.1% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,252 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,252 vs 2,558
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • Modern CPU socket
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (AM4 vs FP5).
    AM4 vs FP5
  • 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
  • 83.4% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (21,033 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    21,033 vs 11,469
  • 8 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (16 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    16 vs 8
  • 27.1% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,252 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,252 vs 2,558
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.2 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 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
  • 34% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (6,978 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    6,978 vs 5,209
  • 24.4% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1910 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,910 vs 1,535
  • 4.5% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cezanne vs Kaby Lake).
    Cezanne 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
  • 77.8% larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (16 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    16 MB vs 9 MB
  • 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
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 2.16x more transistors
    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
  • 8 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    16 usable lanes
    24 vs 16
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 2x more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (128 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    128 GB vs 64 GB
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • 5.71x higher GPU clock speed
    This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (2000 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 350 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
  • 5 °C lower CPU temperature
    This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 22.2% lower base power
    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
  • 31.9% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1910 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,910 vs 2,804.5
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C
  • 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)
  • 52% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE is more expensive than the average processor (£380 vs £250).
    £380 vs £250
  • 66.7% fewer GPU execution units
    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
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 52% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE is more expensive than the average processor (£380 vs £250).
    £380 vs £250
  • Older TPM support
    This processor supports an older TPM version than the average processor (fTPM 2 vs PTT 2).
    fTPM 2.0 vs PTT 2.0
  • 31.9% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1910 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,910 vs 2,804.5
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 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)
  • 66.7% fewer GPU execution units
    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
  • 5 °C lower temperature limit
    This processor has a lower temperature limit than the average processor (95 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    95 °C vs 100 °C

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE

  • Exceptional power efficiency with a 35W TDP, making it ideal for low-noise builds and home servers
  • Strong multi-threaded performance (8 cores, 16 threads) for compilation and multitasking despite low power
  • Includes professional-grade features like ECC memory support and enhanced security
  • Capable integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics suitable for light gaming or basic media tasks
  • Operates significantly cooler than standard 65W or 105W TDP variants

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE

  • Difficult to purchase as an individual consumer because it is primarily an OEM-only part
  • Lacks PCIe Gen 4 support, limiting its use with the fastest modern NVMe SSDs
  • Lower clock speeds and roughly 10-13% slower multi-threaded performance compared to the 5750G or 5700G
  • Locked multiplier prevents traditional overclocking, limiting performance tuning
  • Uses the older AM4 platform, which lacks an upgrade path to DDR5 memory

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE is a performance-focused desktop processor built on the 7nm Zen 3 architecture, featuring 8 cores, 16 threads, and a base clock of 3.2 GHz that boosts up to 4.6 GHz. Designed for high-efficiency enterprise environments, it operates with a remarkably low 35W TDP and includes integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics with a 2000 MHz frequency, as well as 16MB of L3 cache and support for DDR4-3200 memory. Its main pros include exceptional power efficiency for its core count, professional-grade security features like memory encryption, and ECC memory support for improved system reliability. However, its primary cons include a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking, a limitation to the older PCIe 3.0 standard rather than PCIe 4.0, and lower peak clock speeds compared to higher-wattage 'G' series counterparts.

Compare AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5750GE 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 PRO 5750GE and other processors

No results found