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 6900HS review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,500PassMark multi-core score:22943N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.9 GHzCPU socket:FP7TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 10 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.5/10

Overall score

Score
7.5/ 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
â–² Better than 77% of models
Score components

40%

7.1

Technical score

25%

8.2

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

â–²Better than 77% 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

7.5

Overall score

30%

2.6

Price

â–¼Worse than 96%
7.1

Technical score

Technical score
7.1/ 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
â–² Better than 69% of models
Score components

60%

7.2

Performance

18%

6.2

Architecture

10%

7.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 69%
8.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.2/ 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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 83% of models

80%

8.1

Average grade

20%

8.7

Popularity

Grades by review (10)
7 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 3 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.
â–²Better than 83%
?

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~ £1,500
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 6900HS

Based on 6 · 3

Reviewers praise strong graphics and CPU performance, but find it weak for productivity apps and are split on battery life.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS

Technical score
Technical score
7.1/ 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
â–² Better than 69% of models
Score components:

60%

7.2

Performance

18%

6.2

Architecture

10%

7.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

8.4

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

7.1
Reviews score
8.2
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
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

70%

7.5

Overall score

30%

2.6

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
FP7
This processor uses the FP7 CPU socket, which is older than that of 50.4% 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, 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
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
4.9 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.9 GHz which is higher than that of 73.7% 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
22,943
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 22,943 in PassMark, which is higher than 76% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
6 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 6 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 81% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 6 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 6 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 80.6% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% 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
DDR5
This processor supports DDR DDR5, which is newer than that of 64.2% of processors and equal to that of 12.8% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
6,400 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 6,400 MHz, which is higher than that of 82.6% of processors and equal to 8% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5-6400 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5-6400 MHz, which is higher than that of 83.6% of processors and equal to 2.9% 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
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 680M
This processor uses the Radeon 680M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 91.4% of processors and equal to that in 1.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
12
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 12 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 62.7% of processors and equal to 9.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
400 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 400 MHz which is higher than that of 68.4% of processors and equal to that of 8.3% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode)
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 82.1% of processors and equal to 3.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 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
Market range: <15 W – >90 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.
Show more
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,943 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,943 vs 11,469
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rembrandt vs Kaby Lake).
    Rembrandt vs Kaby Lake
  • 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
  • 97% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,524 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,524 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
  • 67.4% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,719 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,719 vs 5,209
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 2x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 22.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.2/ 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
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 83% of models

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    8.7

    Popularity

    Grades by review (10)
    7 reviews: 1 with a printed score, 6 estimated from the review. 3 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.
    8.2 vs 6.7
  • 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
  • 2x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,943 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,943 vs 11,469
  • 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
  • 97% better multi-core performance
    This processor has a higher multi-core performance than the average processor (5,524 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    5,524 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
  • 67.4% higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,719 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    8,719 vs 5,209
  • 11.4% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 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
  • 25.8% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,218 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,218 vs 2,558
  • 25.3% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (614 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    614 vs 490
  • 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
  • 20.1% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,843 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,843 vs 1,535
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Rembrandt vs Kaby Lake).
    Rembrandt vs Kaby Lake
  • 50% smaller process node
    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
    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
  • 2.65x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (13.1 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    13.1 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 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
  • 2x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    6,400 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    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
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • 63.8% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    76.8 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5-6,400 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    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
    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
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4, x2/x2, x1/x1/x1/x1 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4, x2/x2, x1/x1/x1/x1 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
  • 6x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is more expensive than the average processor (£1,500 vs £250).
    £1,500 vs £250
  • 21.4% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS has worse value for money than the average processor (6 vs 7.3).
    6 vs 7.29
  • 17.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (208 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    208 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 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
  • 50% fewer GPU execution units
    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
  • 6x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is more expensive than the average processor (£1,500 vs £250).
    £1,500 vs £250
  • 21.4% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS has worse value for money than the average processor (6 vs 7.3).
    6 vs 7.29
  • 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
  • 17.5% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (208 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    208 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x8/x4/x4, x2/x2, x1/x1/x1/x1 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x8/x4/x4, x2/x2, x1/x1/x1/x1 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 50% fewer GPU execution units
    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 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

Video reviews

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

9.0
Deal Unboxing
≈ estimated
26/03/2023
Hands-on review · unboxing, benchmarks and design
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS powers a strong, well-built laptop that's good value, held back by soldered RAM and a glossy screen.
7.0
Hardware Unboxed
≈ estimated
23/02/2022
Benchmark review · power scaling and integrated graphics
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is a decent upgrade: efficient at low power, trails Intel at higher power, with a strong integrated GPU.
9.0
Andrew Marc David
≈ estimated
30/03/2022
First impressions · benchmarks and 24-hour use
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS powers a thin, light gaming convertible with strong early performance, though fan noise and fixed RAM are trade-offs.
Shop video
Shop video
Brand video
Brand video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
pcworld.com
≈ estimated
17/02/2022
Benchmark review · Laptop processor
Verdict
The Ryzen 9 6900HS is a strong chip for thin laptops, outpacing last year's Ryzen 9 5900HX in most tests but trailing Intel's Core i9-12900HK in single-core work.
8.0
uk.pcmag.com
≈ estimated
17/02/2022
Test results · Laptop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is a strong laptop chip that beats most rivals in Cinebench and Photoshop, but Intel's top laptops still lead.
8.0
pcworld.com
≈ estimated
18/02/2022
Key takeaways · Laptop processor
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS comes close to Intel's flagship speed in thin laptops, with strong integrated graphics, but Intel still leads for pro video and spreadsheet work.
8.0
techspot.com
✓ explicit
01/03/2022
Benchmark review · Thin laptop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is the fastest Ryzen laptop chip tested, with solid performance-per-watt gains, but Intel's Core i7-12700H stays ahead in single-thread and Excel work.
9.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
04/03/2022
Laptop test · Thin gaming laptop
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is an efficient 35W chip for thin laptops, with strong integrated graphics, but its real speed depends on each laptop maker's power settings.
8.0
digitalworlditalia.it
≈ estimated
18/02/2022
Lab test · Thin laptop chip
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is a strong 35W chip for thin, light laptops, with fast integrated graphics, but Intel still leads in photo and video editing.
8.0
tweakers.net
≈ estimated
17/02/2022
Early benchmarks · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is the strongest AMD laptop chip tested so far, but Intel's Core i9-12900H is still clearly ahead in multi-core work.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS

  • High performance-per-watt efficiency, making it ideal for thin and light laptops
  • Excellent integrated graphics performance with the RDNA 2-based Radeon 680M
  • Strong multi-threaded performance that matches or exceeds previous-generation 45W parts at a lower 35W TDP
  • Support for modern platform features including DDR5 memory, PCIe 4.0, and USB4
  • Quiet and cool operation in many laptop designs compared to high-power Intel competitors

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS

  • Lower single-threaded performance and IPC compared to Intel's 12th-gen Alder Lake P-cores
  • Performance does not scale as effectively as competitors at higher power levels (above 45W)
  • Relatively minor architectural leap over the previous Zen 3 generation
  • Reported software and stability issues in some early laptop implementations, such as sleep/hibernation bugs
  • Weaker media engine support for specific creative tasks like live playback in Adobe Premiere compared to Intel QuickSync

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS is a high-end mobile processor based on the Zen 3+ 'Rembrandt' architecture, featuring 8 cores, 16 threads, and a 6nm manufacturing process. It operates with a base clock of 3.3 GHz and can boost up to 4.9 GHz, while maintaining a relatively efficient 35W TDP designed for thin-and-light gaming laptops. Key characteristics include a 16MB L3 cache, support for DDR5-4800 or LPDDR5-6400 memory, and a powerful integrated Radeon 680M GPU with 12 compute units. Main pros include excellent power efficiency compared to H-series chips, strong multi-threaded performance that rivals 45W competitors, and industry-leading integrated graphics for casual gaming. However, its cons include lower single-threaded efficiency when pushed to max boost clocks, lack of an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and it is now surpassed by newer Zen 4 and Zen 5 mobile architectures.

Compare AMD Ryzen 9 6900HS 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 6900HS and other processors

No results found