Core 2 Duo T7400 vs A9-9420

VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9420
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.94
+95.8%
Core 2 Duo T7400
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 34 Watt
0.48

A9-9420 outperforms Core 2 Duo T7400 by an impressive 96% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25232915
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Core 2 Duo
Power efficiency5.931.34
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)28 August 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$286

Detailed specifications

A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400 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 GHz2.16 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.16 GHz
Bus rateno data667 MHz
L1 cache160 KB64 KB
L2 cache1 MB (shared)4 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm65 nm
Die size125 mm2143 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million291 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.1625V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400 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
SocketFT4PBGA479,PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt34 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsVirtualization,no data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon R5no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400.

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 0.94
+95.8%
Core 2 Duo T7400 0.48

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 1500
+97.1%
Core 2 Duo T7400 761

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
+38.9%
Core 2 Duo T7400 234

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
+28.9%
Core 2 Duo T7400 388

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 0.48
Recency 31 May 2016 28 August 2006
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 34 Watt

A9-9420 has a 95.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 126.7% lower power consumption.

The A9-9420 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo T7400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9420 and Core 2 Duo T7400, 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
Intel Core 2 Duo T7400
Core 2 Duo T7400

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
3.7 52 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T7400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9420 or Core 2 Duo T7400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.