Xeon 6710E vs A9-9420
Aggregate performance score
Xeon 6710E outperforms A9-9420 by a whopping 3870% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2750 | 116 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 13.00 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.48 | 7.20 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Sierra Forest (2024) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 3 June 2024 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,749 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E 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 cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 64 (Tetrahexaconta-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 4 MB (per module) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 96 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | Intel 3 nm |
| Die size | 125 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | 85 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E 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 configuration | 1 | 2 |
| Socket | FT4 | FCLGA4710 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 205 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Virtualization, | Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR5-6400 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 TB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 8 |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R5 | N/A |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9420 and Xeon 6710E.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 88 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.88 | 34.94 |
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 3 June 2024 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 64 |
| Threads | 2 | 64 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 205 Watt |
A9-9420 has 1266.7% lower power consumption.
Xeon 6710E, on the other hand, has a 3870.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and 3100% more physical cores and 3100% more threads.
The Intel Xeon 6710E is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A9-9420 in performance tests.
Be aware that A9-9420 is a notebook processor while Xeon 6710E is a server/workstation one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
