SYSTEM ANALYZER

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX + 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)

▼

92 Score

Top 8% Ranking

92 / 100

ULTIMATE READY

Apex Performer

Top 8% of systems. Capable of 4K Ultra gaming and advanced rendering.

4K 60+ FPSVR ReadyRay Tracing

System Balance Analysis

CPU vs GPU performance ratio

Well Balanced

CPU

96%

GPU

88%

PROCESSOR

AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX

69,875 Benchmark Score

Top 4% 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

Optimal Performance

Your system is in the top tier. You can run any modern game at maximum settings.

4K Gaming Ready

Consider a 4K 144Hz monitor to fully utilize your hardware capabilities.

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 9 7940HX and AMD Radeon 740M represent a peculiar pairing: a top-tier 16-core mobile processor designed for heavy compute workloads, coupled with an entry-level integrated GPU meant for basic graphics tasks. Benchmark data confirms this is a laptop-class build with a combined performance percentile of 74, indicating that while the CPU is exceptionally powerful, the overall system performance is anchored by its graphics solution. The data shows a significant capability imbalance, making this configuration suitable for specific professional and productivity tasks rather than immersive gaming or graphical rendering.

GPU Analysis

The AMD Radeon 740M is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture using TSMC’s 4 nm process, with the chip containing 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die. Its clock speeds are listed at a base of 800 MHz and a boost of 2800 MHz, though the memory configuration is entirely "System Shared," meaning its bandwidth is "System Dependent." The GPU features 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units, with 4 dedicated ray tracing cores. Compute capabilities are measured at 2.867 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1) operations, with pixel rate at 22.40 GPixel/s and texture rate at 44.80 GTexel/s.

Benchmark results for the GPU show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 10172 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 15568, giving it an average benchmark score of 12870. This places the Radeon 740M at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs, which is essentially the midpoint of the performance spectrum. The nearest rivals paint a clear picture of its tier: it sits just 0.2% above the AMD FirePro W5100, 0.3% above the AMD Radeon Pro 455, and 0.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590, while trailing the AMD Radeon RX 580 by 0.4%. These deltas are remarkably small, indicating that the 740M performs almost identically to a range of older discrete graphics cards.

The memory situation is critical for interpretation. With no dedicated VRAM, the GPU relies on system memory, and the bandwidth is explicitly listed as "System Dependent." This means performance will vary considerably based on the laptop's memory configuration. The DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support suggests modern rendering features are available, but the underlying hardware limitations will constrain real-world usage. The 45 W TDP for the GPU is modest, and with a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, the data suggests this is an integrated solution designed for efficiency rather than raw throughput. The RT cores are present, but with only 4 of them, ray-traced workloads will likely struggle given the overall compute throughput.

FAQ

Q: What is the performance gap between the CPU and GPU in this build?

A: The CPU sits at the 94th percentile among all CPUs, while the GPU is at the 53rd percentile. The combined system percentile is 74, indicating the CPU is a far stronger component than the GPU.

Q: How does the CPU compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The CPU's average benchmark score is 69875. It is 0.2% below the AMD Ryzen 7 9700F, 0.4% below the Intel Core i7-14700KF, 0.5% above the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X, and 0.7% above the Intel Core i7-14700K.

Q: Does the GPU have dedicated video memory?

A: No, the Radeon 740M uses "System Shared" memory, meaning its memory size, type, and bus width are all system-dependent, and its bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent" as well.

Q: What is the CPU's architecture and process node?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX uses the Zen 4 architecture (codenamed Dragon Range) and is manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC, containing 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die size.

Q: What are the key benchmark scores for the CPU's multi-threaded performance?

A: The CPU scores 29400 in Cinebench R23 multicore, 13447 in 3dmark_max_threads, and 53204 in Passmark multithread tests.

Q: What modern graphics APIs does the GPU support?

A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, according to the benchmark database.

Q: How much L3 cache does the CPU have?

A: The CPU has 64 MB of L3 cache, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 1 MB of L2 cache per core.

CPU Analysis

The AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX is a 16-core, 32-thread processor from the 7000 series, built on the Zen 4 architecture. It operates at a base clock of 2.40 GHz with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, and its TDP is rated at 55 W. The chip is manufactured on a 5 nm process by TSMC, with 13,140 million transistors across a 2x 71 mm² die size. Cache configuration includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 64 MB of L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, and it features a PCIe Gen 5 interface with 28 lanes from the CPU.

Benchmark data shows this CPU is strongly positioned in the high-end mobile segment. It scores 29400 in Cinebench R23 multicore and 1807 in single-core tests. In 3DMark tests, it achieves 12501 in the 16-thread test, 2001 in the 2-thread test, 3844 in the 4-thread test, 7158 in the 8-thread test, 13447 in max-thread, and 1027 in single-thread. Passmark results are equally revealing: 693741 in data compression, 41974 in data encryption, 51029 in extended instructions, 273 in find prime numbers, 121383 in floating point math, 202883 in integer math, 53204 in multithread, 2297 in physics, 81775 in random string sorting, and 3942 in single thread.

The data suggests this CPU excels at heavily parallel workloads. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29400 is exceptional for a 55 W mobile part, indicating that sustained multi-core workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, and scientific computation will benefit enormously from the 16 cores and 32 threads. The jump from 12501 at 16 threads to 13447 at max threads shows scaling, though the modest increase hints at diminishing returns beyond 16 threads in certain tests. The single-thread score of 1807 in Cinebench R23 and 1027 in 3DMark single-thread are strong for mobile, meaning everyday responsiveness and lightly-threaded applications will perform well. The Passmark integer math score of 202883 and floating point of 121383 further confirm the processor's capability in compute-intensive tasks. The 94th percentile ranking among all CPUs underscores that this is a top-tier processor, with its average score of 69875 placing it in the same league as the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Intel Core i7-14700K/KF desktop chips, differing by less than 0.7% from all of its nearest rivals.

Who Should Build It

The data points toward a specific audience for this configuration: professionals and power users who prioritize CPU-intensive workloads over graphics performance. The CPU's 94th percentile ranking makes it ideal for developers compiling large codebases, researchers running simulations, and data analysts processing large datasets. The Passmark data compression score of 693741 and encryption score of 41974 suggest strong performance in file archiving and security-related tasks, making this suitable for small business workstations that handle sensitive data.

Content creators who work primarily with video editing and 3D rendering will find the CPU exceptionally capable, given the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29400. However, the GPU's 53rd percentile means real-time previews and GPU-accelerated effects will be limited, so the target user is one who relies more on CPU rendering than GPU acceleration. Students in engineering or computer science fields would benefit from the processing power for compiling and running complex programs, but they should not expect to play modern games at high settings given the Radeon 740M's performance tier.

The 55 W TDP of the CPU is relatively low for a 16-core part, making it suitable for laptops where thermal management is crucial. This suggests the intended user is someone who needs desktop-class compute performance in a mobile form factor, such as a developer who travels frequently or a researcher who needs to run complex models in the field. Gamers are not the target audience here, as the GPU would bottleneck even at lower resolutions, but the system would serve well as a high-performance workstation for productivity tasks where the CPU dominates.

Benchmark Performance

The CPU's benchmark performance is exceptional across the board. With an average benchmark score of 69875 and a 94th percentile ranking, it outperforms or matches several high-end desktop processors. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29400 is a standout figure, and the 3DMark max-thread score of 13447 reinforces its multi-core strength. Single-threaded performance is also solid, with a 3DMark single-thread score of 1027 and a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1807, though these are less remarkable relative to its multi-core dominance. The Passmark suite shows broad capability, from 693741 in data compression to 202883 in integer math, indicating versatility across different workload types.

The GPU, in contrast, delivers mid-pack results. With an average benchmark score of 12870 and a 53rd percentile, it sits exactly at the median. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 10172 and Vulkan score of 15568 show adequate performance for basic tasks, but the GPU's nearest rivals are older discrete cards like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 and AMD FirePro W5100. The delta percentages are tiny, ranging from -0.4% to +0.3% against its four nearest rivals, meaning this GPU is firmly in the entry-level discrete performance class from several generations ago.

The combined picture is one of stark contrast. The system's combined percentile is 74, which is pulled down significantly by the GPU's 53rd percentile. The CPU contributes the vast majority of the system's capability, and any workload that heavily utilizes the GPU will see overall performance dragged toward the GPU's level. The data shows a machine that is a compute powerhouse but a graphics lightweight, and understanding this imbalance is key to predicting real-world performance across different application types.

Upgrade Path and Platform

The platform is built around the AMD Socket FL1, which supports the Dragon Range processor family. The CPU uses a dual-channel DDR5 memory interface, and with a memory bandwidth of 83.2 GB/s, the system depends heavily on memory speed for both CPU and GPU performance. Since the GPU uses System Shared memory, upgrading the laptop's RAM to faster or higher-capacity modules could directly improve graphics performance, as the bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent." The CPU supports PCIe Gen 5 with 28 lanes, providing ample bandwidth for future high-speed storage or external GPU enclosures, though the integrated GPU connects via PCIe 4.0 x8.

The CPU's TDP is 55 W, and the GPU's TDP is 45 W, so the combined thermal and power envelope is modest for the performance on offer. There is no suggested PSU listed, and the GPU uses no power connectors, confirming this is an integrated solution. For a sensible next upgrade, the data suggests focusing on memory. Since the GPU's bandwidth is system-dependent and the CPU supports dual-channel DDR5, upgrading to the fastest supported memory kit would benefit both components, particularly the GPU which has no dedicated VRAM. The CPU has a 64 MB L3 cache, which helps mitigate memory latency, but the shared memory architecture means that lower-latency or higher-bandwidth RAM could yield tangible gains in GPU-bound tasks.

The socket FL1 is specific to this mobile platform, meaning CPU upgrades are limited to other Dragon Range processors. However, the 7940HX is already at the top of this generation, so the most practical upgrade path is not the CPU but rather the overall system. For users needing better graphics, the PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU could support an external GPU, though this would be an unconventional setup for a laptop. The data indicates that the platform is well-designed for high-performance computing but is constrained by its integrated graphics, so any future upgrade should prioritize the GPU or memory subsystem.

Balance and Bottleneck

The performance data reveals a clear bottleneck. The CPU's 94th percentile versus the GPU's 53rd percentile creates a scenario where the GPU will limit performance in any graphics-intensive or GPU-accelerated workload. For gaming, the GPU is the definitive constraint, as its average benchmark score of 12870 places it at the median, meaning it will struggle with modern titles at high settings. The CPU's immense processing power will sit idle in most gaming scenarios, as the GPU cannot feed it frames fast enough.

In CPU-bound workloads, however, the balance shifts entirely. Tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, and data processing that rely on the CPU will see the system perform at the 94th percentile level. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29400 indicates that the CPU can handle professional-grade rendering workloads, and the Passmark multithread score of 53204 supports this. For these tasks, the GPU is irrelevant, and the system performs as a top-tier workstation.

The FPS scaling evidence, or lack thereof, is important. Since no measured FPS data exists for this combination, the bottleneck analysis relies on benchmark scores. The GPU's 53rd percentile and its proximity to older cards like the GTX 590 suggest that in gaming, frame rates will be modest even at lower resolutions. The CPU's single-thread score of 1027 in 3DMark is adequate for gaming, but it won't compensate for the GPU's limitations. For a balanced system, the GPU would need to be significantly more powerful to match the CPU's capabilities, but in this configuration, the CPU is the dominant component, and the GPU is the limiting factor for graphics tasks.

Build Overview

This build pairs the AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX, a 16-core Zen 4 mobile processor, with the AMD Radeon 740M, an RDNA 3.0 integrated GPU. The build class is laptop, and the combined percentile is 74, placing it in the upper-middle tier of all systems. The CPU is a flagship mobile part, scoring 29400 in Cinebench R23 multicore and ranking at the 94th percentile, while the GPU is a modest integrated solution that ranks at the 53rd percentile with an average score of 12870.

The pairing is unusual because it combines a top-tier compute processor with an entry-level graphics solution. The CPU's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X and Intel Core i7-14700K, which are desktop parts, indicating this mobile CPU competes with desktop-class processors. The GPU, by contrast, rivals the AMD FirePro W5100 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590, which are older discrete cards. This is a workstation-oriented configuration where the CPU is the star, and the GPU is sufficient for basic display output and light acceleration but not for demanding graphics workloads. The overall tier from the percentiles suggests a system that excels at processing and computation but is not designed for gaming or GPU-intensive rendering.

Gaming Performance

No measured FPS data exists for this exact CPU+GPU combination, so the following figures are estimates based on the benchmark scores. The GPU's average benchmark score of 12870 and 53rd percentile place it at the median, which suggests performance comparable to older mid-range discrete GPUs. In practical terms, this means the system would likely handle esports titles at lower settings and resolutions, but modern AAA games would require significant compromises in graphical fidelity.

Given the GPU's 256 shading units and 2.867 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, frame rates in modern games would likely be low. The 8 ROPs and 16 TMUs are minimal, and the system-shared memory with "System Dependent" bandwidth would further constrain performance. For 1080p gaming, the data suggests the system might achieve playable frame rates in older or less demanding titles, but it would struggle with recent releases at high settings. The CPU's strong single-thread performance (1807 in Cinebench R23 single-core) would prevent CPU bottlenecks in most games, but the GPU would be the limiting factor. Users should expect this to be a light gaming system, suitable for indie titles or older games, rather than a high-refresh-rate gaming machine.

Usage Scenarios

High-refresh gaming: The GPU's 53rd percentile and proximity to the GTX 590 indicate this is not suitable for high-refresh gaming. The 2.867 TFLOPS compute and shared memory would likely yield low frame rates, so this scenario is not recommended based on the data.

Streaming: The CPU's 16 cores and 32 threads, with a Passmark multithread score of 53204, are more than capable of handling encoding workloads. The GPU's hardware encoding capabilities are not detailed, but the CPU could handle x264 encoding with minimal impact on performance, making this viable for streaming on a budget.

Video editing: The CPU's Cinebench R23 multicore score of 29400 suggests excellent performance for CPU-based video editing and rendering. However, the GPU's limited compute (2.867 TFLOPS) means GPU-accelerated effects and previews will be slow. The system would work for editing but with a reliance on CPU rendering.

3D rendering: This is a strong scenario for the CPU, given its 94th percentile and 29400 Cinebench R23 multicore score. CPU-based renderers would perform exceptionally well, but GPU-based renderers would be limited by the 740M's performance, making this a mixed scenario.

Software development: The CPU's 202883 integer math score and 693741 data compression score indicate fast compilation and data processing. The 16 cores handle parallel builds efficiently, and the 55 W TDP makes it suitable for a mobile workstation.

Student and office work: The CPU's single-thread performance (3942 in Passmark single-thread) ensures snappy responsiveness for everyday tasks. The GPU is sufficient for basic display output, office applications, and web browsing, making this a capable if overpowered machine for standard academic and office workloads.

Rate My PC: AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX + AMD Radeon 740M

Apex Performer

System Balance Analysis

AMD Ryzen 9 7940HX

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

Optimal Performance

4K Gaming Ready

Performance Tiers Explained

Ultimate

High-End

Mid-Range

Entry Level

Legacy

GPU Analysis

FAQ

CPU Analysis

Who Should Build It

Benchmark Performance

Upgrade Path and Platform

Balance and Bottleneck

Build Overview

Gaming Performance

Usage Scenarios

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