Ultra 7 265KF vs A4-9125 SoC
Primary details
Comparing A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 73 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 100.00 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | no data | 29.53 |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) |
| Release date | April 2017 (7 years ago) | 24 October 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $379 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 20 (Icosa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 5.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 125 mm2 | 243 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FT4 | 1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R3 2CU | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 20 |
| Threads | 2 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 125 Watt |
A4-9125 SoC has 733.3% lower power consumption.
Ultra 7 265KF, on the other hand, has 900% more physical cores and 900% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that A4-9125 SoC is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-9125 SoC and Core Ultra 7 265KF, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
