A9-9420 vs A6-6400K
Aggregate performance score
Primary details
Comparing A6-6400K and A9-9420 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2397 | 2398 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.12 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 1 June 2013 (11 years ago) | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Current price | $87 | $440 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A6-6400K and A9-9420 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96 KB | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB | 1 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 125 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 70 °C | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 70 °C | 74 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on A6-6400K and A9-9420 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 | FM2 | FT4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-6400K and A9-9420. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE1-4a, AES, ABM, AVX, BMI1, AMD64, VT, EVP, Turbo Core 3.0 | Single-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization, |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | FMA4 | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| PowerTune | - | no data |
| TrueAudio | - | no data |
| PowerNow | + | no data |
| PowerGating | + | no data |
| Out-of-band client management | - | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-6400K and A9-9420 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-6400K and A9-9420. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR4 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 8470D | Radeon R5 |
| Number of pipelines | 192 | no data |
| Enduro | + | no data |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | no data |
| UVD | + | no data |
| VCE | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A6-6400K and A9-9420 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A6-6400K and A9-9420 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-6400K and A9-9420.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 8 |
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.
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%
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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 26% 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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 16% 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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 7% 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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 5% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 1% 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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 11% 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%
A6-6400K outperforms A9-9420 by 9% 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%
A9-9420 outperforms A6-6400K by 19% 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%
A9-9420 outperforms A6-6400K by 15% in TrueCrypt AES.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 June 2013 | 31 May 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-6400K and A9-9420.
Note that A6-6400K is a desktop processor while A9-9420 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-6400K and A9-9420, 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.
