SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 7840H + AMD Radeon 740M

Get a comprehensive performance analysis of your gaming rig with detailed benchmarks, bottleneck detection, and upgrade recommendations

Build Configuration

Select your components

PROCESSOR (CPU)

▼

GRAPHICS CARD (GPU)

▼

88 Score

Top 12% Ranking

88 / 100

HIGH-END

Power Build

Top 12% of systems. Excellent for 1440p Ultra or 4K High gaming.

1440p Ultra4K High

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

89%

GPU

88%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 7 7840H

29,868 Benchmark Score

Top 11% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

GRAPHICS CARD

AMD Radeon 740M

12,870 Benchmark Score

Top 12% Market Ranking

View Full Specs →

Market Position

How your build compares to others

Budget

0-30

Mid-Range

30-60

High-End

60-85

Enthusiast

85-100

Your Build

Game Performance Benchmarks

Real-world 4K FPS in popular titles

View All Games →

Performance Insights

Tips to maximize your system

Strong Performance

Excellent for 1440p gaming. Most games will run at high/ultra settings smoothly.

Compatible Games See what you can play Compare CPUs Find upgrades Compare GPUs Find upgrades

Performance Tiers Explained

90-100

Ultimate

4K Ultra gaming, VR ready, ray tracing enabled, professional workloads

4K 60+ FPS VR Ready

70-89

High-End

1440p Ultra or 4K High settings, excellent for modern AAA titles

1440p Ultra 4K High

50-69

Mid-Range

1080p Ultra or 1440p Medium, great value for most gamers

1080p Ultra 1440p Med

30-49

Entry Level

1080p Medium settings, suitable for eSports and older titles

1080p Med eSports

0-29

Legacy

Basic gaming, older titles, consider upgrading for modern games

720p-1080p Low Older Games

The AMD Ryzen 7 7840H paired with the AMD Radeon 740M is an all-AMD mobile platform that pairs a strong Zen 4 processor with a modest RDNA 3 integrated GPU, and the asymmetry between those two components defines everything about this build. The CPU sits in the 81st percentile against all processors, essentially dead level with rivals like the Ryzen 7 5800XT and the Ryzen 7 8845HS, while the iGPU manages only the 53rd percentile against all GPUs. The combined percentile of 67 reflects a laptop that will feel fast in everyday and multi-threaded work but will not deliver enthusiast-class graphics. One important note up front: no measured FPS rows exist for this exact combination in the database — the FACT PACK contains no measuredFps data — so every frame-rate statement below is an estimate derived from the benchmark scores, not from recorded gameplay runs.

CPU Analysis

The Ryzen 7 7840H is an 8-core, 16-thread Zen 4 processor built on TSMC's 4 nm process under the "Phoenix" codename, with a 3.80 GHz base clock and a 5.10 GHz boost clock inside a 35 W TDP envelope. That is a mobile part, and the efficiency of the node shows in how much performance it extracts from that envelope: a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 23731 and a single-core score of 3350 put it in genuine desktop-adjacent territory, not the compromised territory historically associated with thin-and-light chips. The per-core cache allocation is generous, with 64 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per core plus 16 MB of shared L3, which helps sustained throughput in content workloads where working sets spill beyond per-core caches.

The scaling story in the CPU benchmarks is the most interesting part. In 3DMark CPU tests, the chip scores 976 single-threaded, 1906 on two threads, 3638 on four, 6116 on eight, and 7461 on sixteen — then drops slightly to 7409 at max threads. That sixteen-thread figure edging past the eight-thread figure by a meaningful margin indicates the SMT threads are contributing real additional throughput rather than just serving as scheduler padding, which matters for video encoders, compilers, and renderers that scale past physical core counts. The marginal step from eight to sixteen threads being smaller than the step from four to eight is the classic SMT curve: roughly two-thirds of a physical core's worth of gain per logical thread, and the data here fits that pattern.

Against its nearest rivals, the picture is one of remarkable parity. The average benchmark score of 29868 is within a rounding error of the Ryzen 7 5800XT at 29879 (a delta of 0 percent), a hair behind the Ryzen 7 8845HS and the Ryzen 7 7840HS at 29955 (both 0.3 percent ahead), and fractionally ahead of the Ryzen 5 9600X at 29713 (0.5 percent behind the 7840H). In practical terms, a buyer choosing between these chips on CPU performance alone is choosing between functionally identical processors; the 81st percentile placement is what separates this class of silicon from mainstream parts, not the differences among its own peers.

The PassMark subscores round out the workload picture. Integer math lands at 96692, floating point at 58724, and the extended instructions test at 25654 — the latter reflecting AVX-512-class throughput on Zen 4. Data compression scores 341520 and encryption 20162, both respectable figures that translate into quick file archiving and disk-crypto operations. Random string sorting at 38938 and physics at 1301 point to solid responsiveness in simulation-style and branchy workloads. The single-thread PassMark of 3641 confirms the per-thread strength the Cinebench single-core numbers already suggested.

FAQ

Q: How does the Ryzen 7 7840H compare to its closest rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 29868 is statistically tied with the Ryzen 7 5800XT (29879, 0 percent delta), the Ryzen 7 8845HS and 7840HS (29955, 0.3 percent ahead), and the Ryzen 5 9600X (29713, 0.5 percent behind). All four occupy the same performance tier.

Q: Is the Radeon 740M good for gaming?

A: It is an entry-level integrated GPU. With 256 shading units, a 2800 MHz boost clock, and 2.867 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, it sits at the 53rd percentile against all GPUs — comparable to an AMD FirePro W5100 or a Radeon RX 580 in average benchmark terms, which means older or lighter titles are the realistic target at modest settings.

Q: What architecture and process are behind this build?

A: Both chips are built by TSMC on a 4 nm process. The CPU is Zen 4 ("Phoenix") with 25,000 million transistors on a 178 mm² die; the GPU is RDNA 3.0 on the Phoenix2 die with 20,900 million transistors on 137 mm².

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the platform have?

A: The CPU supports dual-channel DDR5 with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and since the Radeon 740M uses system-shared memory, that figure is also the GPU's effective memory bandwidth ceiling.

Q: Which component limits gaming in this pairing?

A: The GPU, decisively. The CPU ranks in the 81st percentile while the iGPU ranks in the 53rd, so frame rates are bound by graphics throughput, not processor throughput.

Q: Does this CPU support overclocking?

A: No. The multiplier is unlocked: false, consistent with a mobile part where firmware and thermal limits govern clocks rather than user tuning.

Q: Are there measured game frame rates for this combination?

A: No. The database contains no measured FPS data for this exact pairing, so all frame-rate discussion here is estimated from the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores and the GPU's percentile position.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark dossier is deep. Cinebench shows 2392 multi / 337 single in R15, 9967 multi / 1407 single in R20, and 23731 multi / 3350 single in R23 — a consistent multi-to-single ratio of roughly seven to one across generations, which confirms the eight cores are all pulling weight. PassMark multithread comes in at 27919 against a single-thread score of 3641, a similar ratio. The 3DMark CPU suite spans 976 to 7461 across thread counts, and the average benchmark score of 29868 anchors the 81st percentile placement.

The GPU side is thinner but sufficient to place it. Geekbench OpenCL returns 10172 and Geekbench Vulkan returns 15568, for an average benchmark score of 12870 and the 53rd percentile. The Vulkan result running more than 50 percent ahead of the OpenCL result is characteristic of modern AMD graphics drivers, which favor the lower-overhead API; any game or application in this build that offers a Vulkan or DirectX 12 path should be preferred over older API fallbacks.

The combined percentile of 67 is the number that best summarizes the machine. It is not the average of 81 and 53; it is dragged toward the GPU because gaming and graphics workloads are where integrated platforms spend their constrained resources. Read it as: a top-quintile CPU bolted to a mid-quintile GPU, yielding an upper-middle-tier overall system.

Balance and Bottleneck

This is one of the most clearly CPU-heavy pairings a laptop can carry. The 28-percentile gap between processor and graphics translates directly into workload behavior: anything CPU-bound — compilation, rendering, compression at 341520 in PassMark's test, encryption at 20162 — runs at full throttle with the GPU idle or barely loaded. Anything GPU-bound — modern 3D games at high settings — hits the Radeon 740M's 2.867 TFLOPS ceiling long before the eight Zen 4 cores break a sweat.

The evidence is in the 3DMark CPU scaling data. Even at sixteen threads the CPU posts 7461, and its physics score of 1301 shows strong simulation throughput, meaning draw-call-heavy and physics-heavy scenes will not starve the processor. The bottleneck is raw pixel and shader throughput: 256 shading units, 16 TMUs producing 44.80 GTexel/s, and 8 ROPs producing 22.40 GPixel/s. Those raster and texture rates are the hard ceilings on frame rate, and no amount of CPU headroom changes them.

There is a secondary consideration: memory. Because the GPU shares system memory, the dual-channel DDR5 pipeline with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth serves both components. In GPU-bound scenarios, bandwidth contention between game assets and CPU working sets can shave performance further, making dual-channel memory population non-negotiable in any laptop built on this pairing. Since no measured FPS data exists for this combination, these scaling conclusions rest on the percentile spread and throughput ceilings rather than recorded runs.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: Not realistic on the Radeon 740M for modern AAA titles. With a 53rd-percentile GPU and 2.867 TFLOPS of shader throughput, esports titles and older games are where frame rates become playable; recent heavy releases will require significant setting reductions. All figures here are estimates, as no measured FPS data exists for this pairing.

Streaming: The CPU side is capable — 7461 on sixteen 3DMark threads and 23731 in Cinebench R23 multi-core leave headroom for encoding alongside gameplay. The problem is that the same GPU rendering the game must also feed the stream, and at 2.867 TFLOPS the graphics budget is already thin. Single-game streaming of lighter titles is feasible; demanding ones are not.

Video editing: Well served by the processor. The 341520 compression score and strong multi-core scaling suit timeline scrubbing, proxies, and export. GPU-accelerated effects will run on the 53rd-percentile iGPU with its 4 RT cores, which helps but does not transform the experience. This is a competent mobile editing station for 1080p-centric projects.

3D rendering: The Cinebench pedigree — 23731 in R23 multi-core — makes CPU-based rendering genuinely productive. GPU-path rendering on 256 shading units is not competitive, so viewport work and GPU render engines are the weak link. Use CPU renderers and this platform performs like a desktop-adjacent workstation.

Software development: Excellent fit. The 3641 single-thread PassMark handles IDE responsiveness, while sixteen threads at 7461 in 3DMark mean parallel builds fly. The 96692 integer-math score and 83 in find-prime-numbers reflect strong general-purpose throughput. Compilation is CPU-bound, which is exactly where this build is strongest.

Student and office work: Effectively overkill in the best way. Browsing, documents, and web apps live in the single-thread domain where the 3350 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 81st percentile placement deliver snappy everyday performance, with ECC memory support available as a data-integrity bonus for professional use.

Gaming Performance

To restate clearly: no measured FPS rows exist for this exact CPU+GPU combination — the database contains no measuredFps data, and dataIsMeasured is false. Everything in this section is an estimate framed from the benchmark scores and should be treated as such.

The Radeon 740M's Geekbench Vulkan score of 15568 and OpenCL score of 10172 place it at the 53rd percentile, with rival-database equivalents in the territory of the Radeon RX 580 and FirePro W5100 in average-score terms. Translating that qualitatively: esports and competitive titles at reduced settings are where this iGPU should hold comfortable frame rates; mid-generation releases should be playable at moderate resolutions with settings turned down; current AAA blockbusters at ultra settings are beyond its 22.40 GPixel/s raster ceiling.

The 4 RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support mean ray-traced effects are technically available, but at this throughput level they are best treated as checkbox features rather than usable settings. The Vulkan advantage over OpenCL suggests that where a game offers API choice, the lower-overhead path is worth taking. Expect the CPU to never be the limiting factor: with 6116 on eight 3DMark threads, the processor will feed this GPU faster than it can consume frames in nearly every scenario.

Who Should Build It

The target user is a mobile professional or student who needs desktop-class CPU throughput without a discrete GPU. Developers fit precisely: the 81st-percentile processor with sixteen threads makes this a legitimate compilation and container-development machine, and the 4 nm efficiency means it does so inside a 35 W TDP. Content creators working in 1080p video or CPU-based rendering will find the 23731 Cinebench R23 multi-core score more than sufficient. Students get long-horizon CPU headroom for coursework, light creation, and esports-tier gaming. Small-business workstation duty is plausible given ECC memory support, suiting the platform to light server or data-sensitive roles. What this build is not for: gamers targeting high settings in modern AAA titles, or creators whose workflows depend on GPU acceleration. The 53rd-percentile graphics define that ceiling.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform facts are mobile-specific. The CPU uses AMD Socket FP8, which is a soldered mobile infrastructure — there is no socket-level CPU upgrade path; platform upgrades here mean replacing the laptop, not the chip. Memory support is DDR5 on a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s of bandwidth, and populating both channels is the single most impactful configuration decision given that the Radeon 740M draws its memory from this shared pool. PCIe provision is Gen 4 with 20 lanes from the CPU, and the GPU rides a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, so a fast NVMe SSD will run at full Gen 4 speed.

Power draw is modest on both sides: a 35 W CPU TDP and a 45 W GPU figure for the iGPU, with no power connectors and no suggested PSU — this is an integrated laptop platform, and thermals are governed by the chassis design rather than user-selected cooling. A sensible next upgrade is therefore external: moving graphics work to an external GPU over the Gen 4 link if the chassis exposes one, or stepping to a laptop built around the same CPU family with the stronger integrated Radeon 780M graphics that this processor itself contains — a notable irony of this specific pairing, since the 7840H's own integrated graphics tier sits above the discrete-slot 740M-class output in this configuration. Within the database's own rival data, the 8845HS (0.3 percent ahead on CPU average) represents the successor-class alternative for those buying new.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 7 7840H + AMD Radeon 740M

Power Build

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 7 7840H

AMD Radeon 740M

Market Position

Game Performance Benchmarks

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Performance Insights

Strong Performance

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

CPU Analysis

FAQ

Benchmark Performance

Balance and Bottleneck

Usage Scenarios

Gaming Performance

Who Should Build It

Upgrade Path and Platform

4K Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

1440p Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

1080p Gaming Performance

Cyberpunk 2077

Red Dead Redemption 2

Microsoft Flight Simulator

Control

Call of Duty: Warzone

Fortnite

Related Processors

Related Graphics Cards

Compare Your CPU

Compare Your GPU

Related PC Builds

Same CPU with Different GPUs

Same GPU with Different CPUs

Other Popular Builds