3015e vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.73
+2.4%

A9-9425 outperforms 3015e by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and 3015e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20432065
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiency10.9226.67
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Pollock (Zen) (2020)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and 3015e 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)
Threads24
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.3 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)192 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and 3015e 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 configuration1no data
SocketFT4FT5
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and 3015e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRANDMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and 3015e are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and 3015e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 900 MHz)AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 600 MHz)

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.

A9-9425 1.73
+2.4%
3015e 1.69

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.

A9-9425 1513
3015e 2677
+76.9%

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.

A9-9425 320
3015e 535
+67.2%

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.

A9-9425 482
3015e 969
+101%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 1.69
Integrated graphics card 1.48 2.98
Recency 31 May 2016 4 August 2020
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

A9-9425 has a 2.4% higher aggregate performance score.

3015e, on the other hand, has 101.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A9-9425 and 3015e.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and 3015e, 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 A9-9425
A9-9425
AMD 3015e
3015e

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.


3.5 1537 votes

Rate A9-9425 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 30 votes

Rate 3015e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or 3015e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.