OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,440PassMark multi-core score:22091N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.6 GHzCPU socket:FP6TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 7 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 69% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

8.0

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

?

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

▲Better than 69% of processors
6.0

Value for money

Value for money
6.0/ 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
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

2.9

Price

▼Worse than 96%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 64% of models
Score components

60%

6.9

Performance

18%

5.9

Architecture

10%

6.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 64%
8.0

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 72% of models

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

8.4

Popularity

Grades by review (7)
3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 72%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,440
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX

Based on 3 · 3

Reviewers mostly agree it holds up well against comparable Intel chips, though a few remain unconvinced by the comparison.
Praised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX

Technical score
Technical score
6.7/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 64% of models
Score components:

60%

6.9

Performance

18%

5.9

Architecture

10%

6.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.2

Platform

1%

7.2

Integrated graphics

6.7
Reviews score
8.0
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 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
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

2.9

Price

6.0
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FP6
This processor uses the FP6 CPU socket, which is older than that of 54.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 54.5% of processors and equal to that of 3.5% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
8
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
CPU threads
16
Market range: <4 – >24
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
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 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 3.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x3.3 GHz which is higher than that of 77.4% of processors and equal to that of 1.4% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
22,091
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 22,091 in PassMark, which is higher than 74.2% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
7 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 7 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 10.5% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 7 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 7 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 55.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L3 cache
16 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 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
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 4 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 9.2% of processors.
L1 cache
512 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 512 KB which is larger than that of 62.8% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
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
4,266 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,266 MHz, which is higher than that of 59.6% of processors and equal to 2.4% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-4266 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR4-4266 MHz, which is higher than that of 57.2% of processors and equal to 2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
AMD Radeon Graphics
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
Market range: <6 – >64
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
300 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 57.2% of processors and equal to 9.1% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% 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: 35-54 W
Show more

AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX 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
  • 92.6% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,091 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,091 vs 11,469
  • 95.2% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,474 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,474 vs 2,804.5
  • 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
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Cezanne vs Kaby Lake).
    Cezanne vs Kaby Lake
  • 45.7% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,590 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,590 vs 5,209
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 19.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.0/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 72% of models

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    8.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (7)
    3 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.0 vs 6.7
  • More extensive crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
    AES, VAES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
  • 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
  • 92.6% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,091 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,091 vs 11,469
  • 95.2% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,474 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,474 vs 2,804.5
  • 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
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • 45.7% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (7,590 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    7,590 vs 5,209
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 23.5% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,159 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,159 vs 2,558
  • 32.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2027 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,027 vs 1,535
  • 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
  • 18% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (578 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    578 vs 490
  • 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 Turbo Core
    This processor has a more advanced Turbo Core version than the average processor (3 vs 2).
    Precision Boost
    3 vs 2
  • 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
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 45.6% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (68.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    68.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 33.3% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4,266 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    4,266 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 1 more supported displays
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 5 °C higher temperature limit
    This processor has a higher temperature limit than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor can run up to 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C
  • 67% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (112.1 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    112.1 vs 340.075
  • 5.76x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is more expensive than the average processor (£1,440 vs £250).
    £1,440 vs £250
  • 22.3% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX has worse value for money than the average processor (5.96 vs 7.3).
    5.96 vs 7.29
  • 5 °C higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, 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)
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Shadow Stack, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Shadow Stack, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 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
  • 5.76x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is more expensive than the average processor (£1,440 vs £250).
    £1,440 vs £250
  • 22.3% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX has worse value for money than the average processor (5.96 vs 7.3).
    5.96 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Shadow Stack, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, SMAP, SMEP, Secure Processor, Shadow Stack, SME vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES, SHA, 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, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 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
  • 67% slower classroom rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (112.1 vs 340.1). The average processor needs 340.075 for the Blender Classroom test.
    112.1 vs 340.075
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, 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 higher CPU temperature
    This processor has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
    105 °C vs 100 °C

Video reviews

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

4.0
WHCVIP
≈ estimated
09/02/2023
Hands-on review · unboxing, cooling and port tests
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX laptop was returned: cooling and fan noise fall short, so it is not recommended for this setup.
9.0
Abhishek Garagad
≈ estimated
07/07/2022
Hands-on review · gaming tests and fan noise checks
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX powers a laptop that performs strongly for its hardware, though fan noise is noticeable in turbo mode.
9.0
Tally Ho Tech
≈ estimated
16/03/2021
Hands-on review · overclocking, power and Cinebench
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX beats Intel in multi-core work, though overclocking gains are small and limited.
9.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
11/02/2021
Benchmark review · laptop CPU tests and comparison
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is the fastest mobile chip tested and a great all-round choice, but only about 4% ahead of the 5800H.
Overview video
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.5
techspot.com
✓ explicit
11/02/2021
Lab test · Laptop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is the fastest 45W laptop chip tested here, but its gain over the 5800H is small in most tasks.
8.0
pcgameshardware.de
≈ estimated
29/01/2021
Lab test · Gaming laptop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is more efficient than Intel's 8-core laptop chip and leads in single-core speed, though Intel still wins some tests.
9.0
laptopspirit.fr
≈ estimated
01/02/2021
Lab test · Laptop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is the strongest mobile chip in this test for video encoding and rendering, but its gaming gain over the 4900H is small.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX

  • Exceptional multi-threaded performance for demanding tasks like 3D rendering and video editing
  • Strong single-core performance, often outperforming equivalent Intel 10th-gen desktop chips
  • Unlocked for overclocking, a rarity for mobile processors
  • Zen 3 architecture provides significant IPC (Instructions Per Clock) gains over the previous generation
  • High efficiency for its performance class due to the 7nm manufacturing process

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX

  • High power consumption can lead to short battery life in laptops under heavy load
  • Generates significant heat, requiring advanced and often loud cooling solutions to avoid thermal throttling
  • Lacks support for PCIe 4.0, which may limit newer top-tier SSD speeds
  • Only a marginal performance lead (approx. 4-6%) over the more affordable Ryzen 7 5800H in many real-world tasks
  • Integrated Vega graphics are considered dated compared to newer Ryzen 6000/7000 series RDNA-based graphics

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX is a high-end mobile processor based on the 7nm Zen 3 'Cezanne' architecture, featuring 8 cores, 16 threads, and a 16MB L3 cache. It operates with a 3.3GHz base clock and a max boost frequency of up to 4.6GHz, supported by an integrated 8-core Radeon Vega 8 GPU clocked at 2100MHz and compatibility with DDR4-3200 or LPDDR4-4266 RAM. Its primary advantages include an unlocked multiplier for enthusiast overclocking, exceptional multi-threaded performance for gaming and content creation, and high power efficiency relative to its performance class. However, its high default TDP of 45W (configurable up to 54W) can lead to significant heat generation and thermal throttling in thin designs, while its reliance on the older PCIe 3.0 standard and relatively high power consumption under load can negatively impact battery life and connectivity speeds compared to newer generations.

Compare AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX 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 9 5900HX and other processors

No results found