A6-9220e vs A4-6210

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-6210
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
0.94
+54.1%
A6-9220e
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.61

A4-6210 outperforms A6-9220e by an impressive 54% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-6210 and A6-9220e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25242799
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency5.939.62
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)1 June 2017 (7 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-6210 and A6-9220e 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 speedno data1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data160 KB
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistorsno data1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4-6210 and A6-9220e 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.

SocketFT3bBGA
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-6210 and A6-9220e. 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, AVXVirtualization,
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-6210 and A6-9220e are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-6210 and A6-9220e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1599DDR4
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R3 GraphicsAMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 600 MHz)
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-6210 and A6-9220e integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-6210 and A6-9220e integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-6210 and A6-9220e.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

A4-6210 0.94
+54.1%
A6-9220e 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.

A4-6210 1495
+54.1%
A6-9220e 970

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.

A4-6210 1374
+30.1%
A6-9220e 1056

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.

A4-6210 4285
+146%
A6-9220e 1741

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.

A4-6210 34.05
+3.4%
A6-9220e 35.2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

A4-6210 135
+56.4%
A6-9220e 86

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.

A4-6210 38
+21%
A6-9220e 31

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.

A4-6210 1
+194%
A6-9220e 0.3

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.

A4-6210 992
+91.1%
A6-9220e 519

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.  

A4-6210 10
+277%
A6-9220e 3

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.  

A4-6210 47
+218%
A6-9220e 15

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

A4-6210 3160
+63.8%
A6-9220e 1929

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

A4-6210 1001
A6-9220e 1247
+24.6%

Geekbench 2

A4-6210 3408
+6.8%
A6-9220e 3192

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 0.61
Recency 29 April 2014 1 June 2017
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

A4-6210 has a 54.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A6-9220e, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and 150% lower power consumption.

The A4-6210 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-9220e in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-6210 and A6-9220e, 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 A4-6210
A4-6210
AMD A6-9220e
A6-9220e

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.


3.1 155 votes

Rate A4-6210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 316 votes

Rate A6-9220e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-6210 or A6-9220e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.