A6-9225 vs A4-4300M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-4300M
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.65

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by a substantial 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-4300M and A6-9225 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26492451
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD Bristol Ridge
Architecture codenameTrinity (2012−2013)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2018 (6 years ago)
Current price$61 $451

Detailed specifications

A4-4300M and A6-9225 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.5 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.1 GHz
L1 cache96 KB160 KB
L2 cache1 MB (shared)1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors1,303 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A4-4300M and A6-9225 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
SocketFS1r2BGA
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-4300M and A6-9225. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMADDR4-2133 RAM (1 channel), PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-4300M and A6-9225 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-4300M and A6-9225. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesunknownDDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 7420GAMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)

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.

A4-4300M 0.65
A6-9225 0.86
+32.3%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 32% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A4-4300M 1000
A6-9225 1331
+33.1%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 33% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A4-4300M 316
+16.6%
A6-9225 271

A4-4300M outperforms A6-9225 by 17% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A4-4300M 405
A6-9225 453
+11.9%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 12% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

A4-4300M 1997
A6-9225 2532
+26.8%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 27% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A4-4300M 3144
A6-9225 4193
+33.4%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 33% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A4-4300M 1684
A6-9225 2132
+26.6%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 27% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

A4-4300M 50.4
A6-9225 26.28
+91.8%

A4-4300M outperforms A6-9225 by 92% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

A4-4300M 1
A6-9225 1
+19.2%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 19% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A4-4300M 93
A6-9225 109
+16.7%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 17% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A4-4300M 60
A6-9225 73
+21.7%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 22% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

A4-4300M 0.68
A6-9225 0.85
+25%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 25% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4-4300M 0.6
A6-9225 1
+57.8%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 58% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4-4300M 1072
+25.8%
A6-9225 852

A4-4300M outperforms A6-9225 by 26% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4-4300M 7
A6-9225 9
+28.5%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 29% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4-4300M 36
A6-9225 49
+35.8%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 36% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A4-4300M 2115
A6-9225 3103
+46.7%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 47% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A4-4300M 1512
A6-9225 1855
+22.7%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 23% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A4-4300M 3184
A6-9225 3936
+23.6%

A6-9225 outperforms A4-4300M by 24% in Geekbench 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.86
Integrated graphics card 0.80 1.17
Recency 15 May 2012 1 June 2018
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

The A6-9225 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-4300M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-4300M and A6-9225, 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 A4-4300M
A4-4300M
AMD A6-9225
A6-9225

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.


3 107 votes

Rate A4-4300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2221 vote

Rate A6-9225 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-4300M or A6-9225, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.