A4 PRO-7300B vs A9-9425

VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.79
+88.4%

A9-9425 outperforms A4 PRO-7300B by an impressive 88% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20262512
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Power efficiency10.881.33
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)August 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B 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 speed3.1 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)96 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1024 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size124.5 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C70 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °C70 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million1,303 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B 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
SocketFT4FM2
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B. 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, RDRANDno data
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3-1600
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)AMD Radeon HD 8470D
Number of pipelinesno data192
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 11

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

A9-9425 1.79
+88.4%
A4 PRO-7300B 0.95

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
+3.8%
A4 PRO-7300B 1458

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.79 0.95
Integrated graphics card 1.48 0.97
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

A9-9425 has a 88.4% higher aggregate performance score, 52.6% faster integrated GPU, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4 PRO-7300B in performance tests.

Be aware that A9-9425 is a notebook processor while A4 PRO-7300B is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and A4 PRO-7300B, 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 A4 PRO-7300B
A4 PRO-7300B

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 1524 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 37 votes

Rate A4 PRO-7300B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or A4 PRO-7300B, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.