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 9850HX review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£1,580PassMark multi-core score:51665N. of physical cores:12CPU boost clock speed:5.2 GHzCPU socket:FL1TDP (Thermal design power):55 W

AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX
7.7/10

Overall score

Score
7.7/ 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 87% of models
Score components

40%

8.4

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

▲Better than 87% of processors
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 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 95% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

2.2

Price

▼Worse than 95%
8.4

Technical score

Technical score
8.4/ 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 92% of models
Score components

60%

8.5

Performance

18%

8.4

Architecture

10%

8.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

7.9

Integrated graphics

★Better than 92%
?

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
▼
<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-9-9850hx
amd-ryzen-9-9850hx
Where to buy
    N/A~ £1,580
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX

Technical score
Technical score
8.4/ 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 92% of models
Score components:

60%

8.5

Performance

18%

8.4

Architecture

10%

8.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.9

Platform

1%

7.9

Integrated graphics

8.4
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 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 95% of models
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

2.2

Price

6.1
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.
laptop
CPU socket
FL1
This processor uses the FL1 CPU socket, which is older than that of 63.2% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Chipset
X870E, X870, B850, B840, X670E, X670, B650E, B650, A620
This processor supports X870E, X870, B850, B840, X670E, X670, B650E, B650, A620 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 92% of processors and equal to that of 3.3% 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
12
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 12 CPU cores, which is more than 79.9% of processors and equal to 5.7% of processors.
CPU threads
24
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 24 CPU threads, which is more than 89.7% of processors and equal to 4.4% 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
12x 3.0 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 12x3.0 GHz which is higher than that of 89.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
51,665
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 51,665 in PassMark, which is higher than 95.9% of processors.
Show more
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
64 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 64 MB which is larger than that of 94.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.8% of processors.
L2 cache
12 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 83.1% of processors and equal to that of 2.9% of processors.
L1 cache
960 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 960 KB which is larger than that of 84.6% of processors and equal to that of 1% 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
5,600 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.9% of processors and equal to 4.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR5-5600 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5600 MHz, which is higher than that of 77.4% of processors and equal to 6.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
?
Maximum memory capacity
96 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 96 GB of memory, which is more than 53.4% of processors and equal to 5.8% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Radeon 610M
This processor uses the Radeon 610M integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 88.9% of processors and equal to that in 1.9% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
2
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 2 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 95.5% of processors and equal to 4.5% 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/encode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), AV1 (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is broader support than 90.8% of processors and equal to 3.4% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
55 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 55 W which is higher than that of 61.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
55 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 55 W which is higher than that of 61.8% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% 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

AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.5x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (51,665 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    51,665 vs 11,469
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Fire Range vs Kaby Lake).
    Fire Range vs Kaby Lake
  • 74.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,459 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,459 vs 2,558
  • 2.05x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,147 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,147 vs 1,535
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 3.83x higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (1,879 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    1,879 vs 490
  • 5 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2025 vs 2020).
    January 2025
    2025 vs 2020
  • 4.5x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (51,665 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    51,665 vs 11,469
  • 74.3% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,459 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,459 vs 2,558
  • 2.05x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,147 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,147 vs 1,535
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 16 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (24 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    24 vs 8
  • 6 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (12 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    12 vs 6
  • 3.83x higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (1,879 vs 490). The average processor scores 490 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    1,879 vs 490
  • 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
  • Unlocked for overclocking
    This processor has an unlocked multiplier, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors offer this.
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (12x3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    12x3.0 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Fire Range vs Kaby Lake).
    Fire Range vs Kaby Lake
  • 7.11x larger L3 cache
    This processor has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (64 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    64 MB vs 9 MB
  • 4x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (12 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    12 MB vs 3 MB
  • 2.88x more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (5.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    5.33 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 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
  • 2.5x larger L1 cache
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (960 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    960 KB vs 384 KB
  • 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
  • 3.36x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (16.6 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    16.63 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 12 more PCIe lanes
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (28 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    28 vs 16
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5 vs 3
  • 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
  • Supports memory overclocking
    This processor supports memory overclocking, while the average processor does not. 43.9% of processors support memory overclocking.
  • 75% higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    5,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR5 vs DDR4
  • Supports ECC memory
    This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    DDR5-5,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 50% more memory capacity
    This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (96 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    96 GB vs 64 GB
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Radeon 610M vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Radeon 610M 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
  • 42.6% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,609 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,609 vs 2,804.5
  • 48.6% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (263 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    263 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • 6.32x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is more expensive than the average processor (£1,580 vs £250).
    £1,580 vs £250
  • 20.2% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX has worse value for money than the average processor (6.06 vs 7.3).
    6.06 vs 7.29
  • 91.7% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (2 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    2 vs 24
  • 22.2% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 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
  • 6.32x more expensive
    AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is more expensive than the average processor (£1,580 vs £250).
    £1,580 vs £250
  • 20.2% worse value for money
    AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX has worse value for money than the average processor (6.06 vs 7.3).
    6.06 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
  • 42.6% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,609 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,609 vs 2,804.5
  • 48.6% larger die size
    This processor has a higher die size than the average processor (263 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    263 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x16, x8/x8, x8/x4/x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 91.7% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (2 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    2 vs 24
  • 22.2% higher base power
    This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W
  • 22.2% higher TDP
    This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (55 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    55 W vs 45 W

Third-party reviews

What customers like about AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX

  • High core count with 12 Zen 5 cores and 24 threads for excellent multi-threaded performance
  • Strong single-core boost clock of up to 5.2 GHz, making it great for high-end gaming
  • Unlocked multiplier allows for easy overclocking and performance tuning
  • Modern 4nm FinFET manufacturing process ensures improved energy efficiency compared to older nodes
  • Supports latest connectivity standards including DDR5-5600 memory and PCIe Gen 5
  • Large 64 MB L3 cache helps reduce latency and boost performance in demanding applications

What customers don't like about AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX

  • High default TDP (55W) and boost consumption (up to 101W) necessitate substantial cooling solutions in laptops
  • Integrated Radeon 610M graphics is basic and not intended for modern gaming without a dedicated GPU
  • Lacks the specialized 3D V-Cache found in higher-tier 'HX3D' models, which offers better peak gaming performance
  • Limited to 12 cores compared to the 16 cores available in the flagship Ryzen 9 9955HX
  • High operating temperatures (up to 100°C) can lead to thermal throttling in smaller laptop chassis

Verdict

The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is a high-end mobile processor based on the Zen 5 'Fire Range' architecture, featuring 12 cores and 24 threads with a base clock of 3.0 GHz and a maximum boost speed of up to 5.2 GHz. Manufactured on a 4nm process, it includes a substantial 76 MB of total cache (64 MB L3), supports DDR5-5600 memory, and utilizes PCIe Gen 5 connectivity for high-speed components. Main advantages include exceptional multi-threaded performance for gaming and content creation, high energy efficiency with a default TDP of 55W (configurable from 45W to 75W), and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Potential drawbacks include a lower core count compared to the flagship 16-core 9955HX models, the lack of the specialized 3D V-Cache found in 'X3D' variants, and high thermal output when pushed to its 75W upper limit in thin-and-light chassis.

Compare AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX 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 9850HX and other processors

No results found