A9-9410 vs A8-7650K

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-7650K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.97
+105%
A9-9410
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.96

A8-7650K outperforms A9-9410 by a whopping 105% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-7650K and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19442503
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.31no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD A-Series (Desktop)AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency1.966.05
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date7 January 2015 (9 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$152no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A8-7650K 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.3 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.5 GHz
L1 cache256 KBno data
L2 cache4096 KB2048 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size245 mm2125 mm2
Maximum core temperature72 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors2,411 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on A8-7650K 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 configuration11
SocketFM2+FP4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-7650K and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE1-4a, AVX, AES, FMA4, VTVirtualization,
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC++
FreeSync++
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect+-
HSA+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-7650K and A9-9410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-7650K and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR4-2133
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core count63
จำนวนพาธไลน์384no data
Enduro++
Switchable graphics++
UVD++
VCE++

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-7650K and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort++
HDMI++

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-7650K and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Vulkan++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-7650K and A9-9410.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes168

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.

A8-7650K 1.97
+105%
A9-9410 0.96

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.

A8-7650K 3132
+105%
A9-9410 1528

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.

A8-7650K 2904
+7.8%
A9-9410 2694

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.

A8-7650K 9456
+105%
A9-9410 4619

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.

A8-7650K 4410
+79.6%
A9-9410 2455

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.

A8-7650K 14.2
+68.7%
A9-9410 23.95

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.

A8-7650K 3
+111%
A9-9410 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

A8-7650K 296
+128%
A9-9410 130

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.

A8-7650K 84
+33.3%
A9-9410 63

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.

A8-7650K 0.96
+17.1%
A9-9410 0.82

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.

A8-7650K 2
+100%
A9-9410 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.

A8-7650K 2105
+139%
A9-9410 879

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.  

A8-7650K 23
+124%
A9-9410 10

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.  

A8-7650K 108
+102%
A9-9410 54

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

A8-7650K 6597
+100%
A9-9410 3299

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

A8-7650K 2197
+3%
A9-9410 2134

Geekbench 2

A8-7650K 6033
+41.6%
A9-9410 4260

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.97 0.96
Recency 7 January 2015 31 May 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 15 Watt

A8-7650K has a 105.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A9-9410, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 533.3% lower power consumption.

The A8-7650K is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.

Note that A8-7650K is a desktop processor while A9-9410 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-7650K and A9-9410, 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 A8-7650K
A8-7650K
AMD A9-9410
A9-9410

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.


3.9 191 vote

Rate A8-7650K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 115 votes

Rate A9-9410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-7650K or A9-9410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.