A6-7310 vs A6-9400

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-9400
2019
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
1.71
+1.2%
A6-7310
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.69

A6-9400 outperforms A6-7310 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-9400 and A6-7310 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20382046
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD A-Series
Power efficiency2.496.40
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Carrizo-L (2015)
Release date16 March 2019 (5 years ago)7 May 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-9400 and A6-7310 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed3.4 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache160Kno data
L2 cache1 MB (shared)2048 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors3,100 million930 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on A6-9400 and A6-7310 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
SocketAM4FP4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt12-25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9400 and A6-7310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-9400 and A6-7310 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9400 and A6-7310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR3L-1866
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon R5AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-9400 and A6-7310 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-9400 and A6-7310 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-9400 and A6-7310.

PCIe version3.02.0
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.

A6-9400 1.71
+1.2%
A6-7310 1.69

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.

A6-9400 2717
+1%
A6-7310 2689

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.71 1.69
Recency 16 March 2019 7 May 2015
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 12 Watt

A6-9400 has a 1.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 years.

A6-7310, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 441.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-9400 and A6-7310.

Note that A6-9400 is a desktop processor while A6-7310 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9400 and A6-7310, 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 A6-9400
A6-9400
AMD A6-7310
A6-7310

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.


2.7 26 votes

Rate A6-9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 510 votes

Rate A6-7310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-9400 or A6-7310, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.