AMD A8-7410 vs A9-9425

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

A9-9425
1.79
+0.6%

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 1% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

Comparing A9-9425 and A8-7410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking18811882
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD A-Series
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Carrizo-L (2015)
Release date31 May 2016 (7 years old)7 May 2015 (8 years old)
Current price$561 $415

Technical specs

A9-9425 and A8-7410 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 speed3.1 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.5 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2048 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million930 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and A8-7410 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
SocketFT4FP4
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt12 - 25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and A8-7410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSingle-Channel DDR4-2133 RAM, VirtualizationMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT, AMD-V
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data-
PowerNowno data+
PowerGatingno data+
Out-of-band client managementno data-
VirusProtectno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and A8-7410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and A8-7410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3L-1866
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A9-9425 and A8-7410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A9-9425 and A8-7410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and A8-7410.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

A9-9425 1.79
+0.6%
A8-7410 1.78

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 1% in our combined 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%

A9-9425 1505
A8-7410 2741
+82.1%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 82% in Passmark.

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%

A9-9425 320
+33.9%
A8-7410 239

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 34% 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%

A9-9425 482
A8-7410 630
+30.7%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 31% 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%

A9-9425 2686
+40.1%
A8-7410 1917

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 40% 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%

A9-9425 4338
A8-7410 4665
+7.5%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 8% 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%

A9-9425 2314
A8-7410 2936
+26.9%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 27% 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%

A9-9425 25.83
+4.5%
A8-7410 27

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 5% 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%

A9-9425 2
A8-7410 2
+24.7%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 25% 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%

A9-9425 125
A8-7410 174
+39.2%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 39% 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%

A9-9425 76
+46.2%
A8-7410 52

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 46% 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%

A9-9425 0.9
+47.5%
A8-7410 0.61

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 48% 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%

A9-9425 1
A8-7410 1

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%

A9-9425 891
A8-7410 1292
+45%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 45% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

A9-9425 51
+10.9%
A8-7410 46

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 11% in x264 encoding pass 1.

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%

A9-9425 10
+0.1%
A8-7410 10

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A9-9425 2039
+62.3%
A8-7410 1256

A9-9425 outperforms A8-7410 by 62% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A9-9425 3323
A8-7410 3687
+11%

A8-7410 outperforms A9-9425 by 11% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.79 1.78
Integrated graphics card 1.33
Recency 31 May 2016 7 May 2015
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 12 Watt

We couldn't decide between A9-9425 and A8-7410. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and A8-7410, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A9-9425
A9-9425
AMD A8-7410
A8-7410

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.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 1478 votes

Rate AMD A9-9425 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 606 votes

Rate AMD A8-7410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or A8-7410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.