A4-3400 vs A9-9420

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9420
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.95
+37.7%
A4-3400
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.69

A9-9420 outperforms A4-3400 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9420 and A4-3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25202733
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Power efficiency5.991.00
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)7 September 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9420 and A4-3400 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed3 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cache160 KB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (shared)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size125 mm2228 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A9-9420 and A4-3400 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
SocketFT4FM1
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9420 and A4-3400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsVirtualization,no data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9420 and A4-3400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9420 and A4-3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon R5Radeon HD 6410D

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9420 and A4-3400.

PCIe version3.0no data
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.

A9-9420 0.95
+37.7%
A4-3400 0.69

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.

A9-9420 1502
+37.9%
A4-3400 1089

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.

A9-9420 325
+12.5%
A4-3400 289

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.

A9-9420 500
+3.1%
A4-3400 485

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.95 0.69
Recency 31 May 2016 7 September 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

A9-9420 has a 37.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The A9-9420 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-3400 in performance tests.

Be aware that A9-9420 is a notebook processor while A4-3400 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9420 and A4-3400, 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 A9-9420
A9-9420
AMD A4-3400
A4-3400

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.


2.8 513 votes

Rate A9-9420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 83 votes

Rate A4-3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9420 or A4-3400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.