A9-9410 vs A8-6600K
Aggregate performance score
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by an impressive 97% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-6600K and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1866 | 2382 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.47 | 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) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $142 | no data |
| Current price | $67 (0.5x MSRP) | $722 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A8-6600K and A9-9410 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 2048 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 125 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °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 A8-6600K and A9-9410 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 | FP4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-6600K and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Single-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization, |
| AES-NI | 1 | + |
| FMA | FMA4 | + |
| AVX | AVX | + |
| FRTC | no data | 1 |
| FreeSync | no data | 1 |
| PowerTune | - | - |
| TrueAudio | - | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| Out-of-band client management | - | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| RAID | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-6600K and A9-9410 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-6600K and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR4-2133 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 8570D | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |
| iGPU core count | no data | 3 |
| Number of pipelines | 256 | no data |
| Enduro | + | + |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | 1 |
| UVD | + | + |
| VCE | + | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A8-6600K and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A8-6600K and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | DirectX® 12 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-6600K and A9-9410.
| 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.
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 97% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 97% in Passmark.
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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 20% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 74% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 91% 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%
A9-9410 outperforms A8-6600K by 34% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 114% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 17% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 90% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 195% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 119% 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%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 98% in x264 encoding pass 1.
Geekbench 2
Benchmark coverage: 5%
A8-6600K outperforms A9-9410 by 37% in Geekbench 2.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.95 | 0.99 |
| Recency | 1 June 2013 | 31 May 2016 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
The A8-6600K is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.
Note that A8-6600K is a desktop processor while A9-9410 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-6600K and A9-9410, 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.
