E2-9000 vs A12-9800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A12-9800
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.27
+272%
E2-9000
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.61

A12-9800 outperforms E2-9000 by a whopping 272% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A12-9800 and E2-9000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18232802
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.47no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataBristol Ridge
Power efficiency3.295.74
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$139no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A12-9800 and E2-9000 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.8 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz2.2 GHz
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A12-9800 and E2-9000 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1no data
SocketAM4BGA
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A12-9800 and E2-9000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A12-9800 and E2-9000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A12-9800 and E2-9000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR4
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 600 MHz)
iGPU core count8no data
Enduro+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A12-9800 and E2-9000 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A12-9800 and E2-9000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A12-9800 and E2-9000.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A12-9800 2.27
+272%
E2-9000 0.61

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A12-9800 3611
+273%
E2-9000 967

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.27 0.61
Recency 27 July 2017 1 June 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 10 Watt

A12-9800 has a 272.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E2-9000, on the other hand, has 550% lower power consumption.

The A12-9800 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-9000 in performance tests.

Note that A12-9800 is a desktop processor while E2-9000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A12-9800 and E2-9000, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A12-9800
A12-9800
AMD E2-9000
E2-9000

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3 197 votes

Rate A12-9800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 314 votes

Rate E2-9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A12-9800 or E2-9000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.