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 8945HS review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£410PassMark multi-core score:29411N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:5.2 GHzCPU socket:FP7TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS Review: Compare 74 technical specifications, 6 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS
7.9/10

Overall score

Score
7.9/ 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 90% of models
Score components

40%

8.0

Technical score

25%

7.9

Reviews score

25%

8.0

List score

10%

?

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

★Better than 90% of processors
8.0

Value for money

Value for money
8.0/ 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
▲ Better than 86% of models
Score components

70%

7.9

Overall score

30%

8.4

Price

▲Better than 86%
8.0

Technical score

Technical score
8.0/ 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 86% of models
Score components

60%

8.2

Performance

18%

7.1

Architecture

10%

8.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

▲Better than 86%
7.9

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.9/ 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 66% of models

80%

7.8

Average grade

20%

8.3

Popularity

Grades by review (6)
3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 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.
▲Better than 66%
8.0

List score

List score
8.0/ 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 (1)
List score: in 1 of 85 lists (1%)
▲Better than 89%
  • amd-ryzen-9-8945hs
amd-ryzen-9-8945hs
Where to buy
    N/A~ £410
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 8945HS

Based on 3 · 2

Reviewers praise strong overall performance and good efficiency, though they're divided on whether gaming results really impress.
Praised
Mixed views
Pick a topic to see who said what
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS

Technical score
Technical score
8.0/ 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 86% of models
Score components:

60%

8.2

Performance

18%

7.1

Architecture

10%

8.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

8.2

Integrated graphics

8.0
Reviews score
7.9
List score
8.0
Value for money
Value for money
8.0/ 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
▲ Better than 86% of models
Score components:

70%

7.9

Overall score

30%

8.4

Price

8.0
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
Intel 600 Series
This processor supports Intel 600 Series chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 80.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
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, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V instruction sets, which is broader support than 78.4% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% 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
5.2 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 5.2 GHz which is higher than that of 88.9% of processors and equal to that of 3% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
8x 4 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 8x4 GHz which is higher than that of 86.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
29,411
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 29,411 in PassMark, which is higher than 85.3% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
4 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 4 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 86.8% of processors and equal to that of 7.7% of processors.
Foundry
TSMC 4 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 4 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 86.4% of processors and equal to that of 7.8% 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
8 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 8 MB which is larger than that of 72% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% 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
7,500 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 7,500 MHz, which is higher than that of 92.2% of processors and equal to 3.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-7500 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-7500 MHz, which is higher than that of 93.1% of processors and equal to 3.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
256 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 256 GB of memory, which is more than 89% of processors and equal to 8.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 780M
This processor uses the Radeon 780M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 95.2% of processors and equal to that in 1.9% 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
800 MHz
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 800 MHz which is higher than that of 86.6% of processors and equal to that of 6.3% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode/encode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 59.6% of processors and equal to 1.5% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
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
What reviewers say

AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.56x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (29,411 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    29,411 vs 11,469
  • 2.21x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,518 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,518 vs 5,209
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Hawk Point vs Kaby Lake).
    Hawk Point vs Kaby Lake
  • 49.5% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,823 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,823 vs 2,558
  • 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
  • 18.2% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 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
  • 53.5% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,356 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,356 vs 1,535
  • 17.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    7.9/ 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 66% of models

    80%

    7.8

    Average grade

    20%

    8.3

    Popularity

    Grades by review (6)
    3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 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.
    7.9 vs 6.7
  • 9.9% better value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS has better value for money than the average processor (8 vs 7.3).
    8 vs 7.29
  • 3 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2023 vs 2020).
    December 2023
    2023 vs 2020
  • 2.56x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (29,411 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    29,411 vs 11,469
  • 2.21x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (11,518 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    11,518 vs 5,209
  • 49.5% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,823 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    3,823 vs 2,558
  • 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
  • 18.2% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    5.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 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
  • 53.5% higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2,356 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    2,356 vs 1,535
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (8x4 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    8x4 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
  • 12 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (40 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    40 vs 28
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    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
    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
  • More advanced foundry
    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
  • 2.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (8 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    8 MB vs 3 MB
  • 2x more L2 per 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
    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
  • 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
  • 4x more memory capacity
    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
  • 2.34x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7,500 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    7,500 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • 91% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    89.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4 vs 3
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    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
    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
    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
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Memory Guard, Secure Processor vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Memory Guard, Secure Processor vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 64% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS is more expensive than the average processor (£410 vs £250).
    £410 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
  • 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
  • 64% more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS is more expensive than the average processor (£410 vs £250).
    £410 vs £250
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Memory Guard, Secure Processor vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Memory Guard, Secure Processor vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • 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
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 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

Video reviews

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

8.0
Chigz Tech Reviews
≈ estimated
28/06/2024
Hands-on review · gaming, benchmarks and thermals
Verdict
AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS handles everyday tasks and light gaming well, but cooling, fan noise and price are drawbacks.
6.0
Iceberg Tech
≈ estimated
17/06/2024
Gaming and benchmark tests · mini PC on integrated graphics
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS matches its predecessor in games, but cooling and BIOS problems hold this mini PC back.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
computerbase.de
≈ estimated
13/02/2024
Lab test · Integrated graphics gaming
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS keeps the lead in laptop integrated-graphics gaming, though the gap to Intel has shrunk.
7.0
stadt-bremerhaven.de
≈ estimated
02/06/2024
Hands-on test · Compact mini-PC
Verdict
The Geekom A8 suits office and media work in a compact metal case, but it is no faster than the A7 and runs louder.
8.0
elchapuzasinformatico.com
≈ estimated
13/02/2024
Benchmark comparison · Laptop chips
Verdict
The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS is faster than the Core Ultra 7 155H in games and several benchmarks, but Intel idles at lower power.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS

  • Exceptional 1080p gaming performance for an integrated GPU (Radeon 780M)
  • Significant 40% boost in AI-driven workloads compared to the previous 7040 series
  • High energy efficiency due to the 4nm manufacturing process
  • Strong multi-threaded performance, making it a reliable 'workhorse' for creative tasks like video editing
  • Supports advanced features like AV1 hardware encoding/decoding and USB4

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS

  • Incremental upgrade over the Ryzen 9 7940HS with minimal raw CPU performance gains
  • NPU performance (16 TOPS) is lower than the newer Ryzen AI 300 series (50 TOPS) for local AI models
  • Performance is heavily dependent on the laptop's specific cooling solution and power limits (TDP)
  • The multiplier is locked, preventing users from overclocking for extra performance
  • May experience thermal throttling in extremely thin chassis under sustained heavy loads

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS is a high-performance 8-core, 16-thread mobile processor based on the Zen 4 'Hawk Point' architecture, manufactured on a power-efficient TSMC 4nm process. It features a base clock of 4.0 GHz, a max boost frequency of up to 5.2 GHz, and a default TDP of 45W (configurable from 35W to 54W). Key characteristics include an integrated Radeon 780M iGPU with 12 compute units and a dedicated Ryzen AI NPU capable of up to 16 TOPS for local AI acceleration. Its main pros are exceptional single-core and multi-threaded performance for productivity, solid 1080p gaming capabilities without a dedicated GPU, and support for modern technologies like DDR5-5600/LPDDR5x-7500 RAM, PCIe 4.0, and AV1 hardware encoding. However, it is not user-replaceable as it is a BGA-soldered chip, lacks overclocking support due to a locked multiplier, and requires robust active cooling to maintain peak performance under heavy sustained workloads.

Compare AMD Ryzen 9 8945HS 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 8945HS and other processors

No results found