Core Ultra 9 185H vs A9-9410

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9410
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.99
Core Ultra 9 185H
2023
16 cores / 22 threads, 45 Watt
18.70
+1789%

Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by a whopping 1789% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2382288
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Meteor Lake-H
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Meteor Lake-H
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)14 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Current price$722 no data

Detailed specifications

A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H 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)16 (Hexadeca-Core)
Threads222
Base clock speed2.9 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz5.1 GHz
L1 cacheno data112 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB2 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data24 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm7 nm
Die size125 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H 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
SocketFP4FCBGA2049
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSingle-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization,Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
PowerNow-no data
PowerGating-no data
Out-of-band client management-no data
VirusProtect-no data
RAID-no data
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
TSXno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
SIPPno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data+
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+
IOMMU 2.0-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2133DDR5
Maximum memory sizeno data96 GB
Max memory channels12
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 GraphicsIntel® Arc™ graphics
iGPU core count3no data
Quick Sync Videono data+
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data
Graphics max frequencyno data2.35 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data4
DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz (HDMI 2.1 TMDS) 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz (HDMI2.1 FRL)
Max resolution over eDPno data3840x2400 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 1212.2
OpenGLno data4.6
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes828
PCI supportno data5.0 and 4.0

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.

A9-9410 0.99
Ultra 9 185H 18.70
+1789%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 1789% 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%

A9-9410 1527
Ultra 9 185H 28925
+1794%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 1794% 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%

A9-9410 2694
Ultra 9 185H 10300
+282%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 282% 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%

A9-9410 4619
Ultra 9 185H 59935
+1198%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 1198% 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%

A9-9410 2455
Ultra 9 185H 11420
+365%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 365% 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 23.95
Ultra 9 185H 5.68
+322%

A9-9410 outperforms Core Ultra 9 185H by 322% 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%

A9-9410 2
Ultra 9 185H 34
+2035%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 2035% 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%

A9-9410 130
Ultra 9 185H 2746
+2012%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 2012% 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%

A9-9410 63
Ultra 9 185H 268
+325%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 325% 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%

A9-9410 0.82
Ultra 9 185H 3.27
+299%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 299% 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%

A9-9410 1
Ultra 9 185H 9.6
+860%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 860% 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%

A9-9410 879
Ultra 9 185H 12898
+1367%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 1367% 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%

A9-9410 10
Ultra 9 185H 158
+1462%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 1462% 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%

A9-9410 54
Ultra 9 185H 336
+527%

Core Ultra 9 185H outperforms A9-9410 by 527% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.99 18.70
Recency 31 May 2016 14 December 2023
Physical cores 2 16
Threads 2 22
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 45 Watt

The Core Ultra 9 185H is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9410 and Core Ultra 9 185H, 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 A9-9410
A9-9410
Intel Core Ultra 9 185H
Core Ultra 9 185H

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.


2.8 111 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 196 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 185H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9410 or Core Ultra 9 185H, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.