A8-7680 vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.77

A8-7680 outperforms A9-9425 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and A8-7680 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19301730
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data15.78
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Godaveri (2014−2018)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)26 October 2018 (5 years ago)
Current price$561 $53

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and A8-7680 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.8 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)128K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size124.5 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °C74 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and A8-7680 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 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and A8-7680. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDDR4-2133 RAM (1 channel), PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRANDno data
AES-NI+no data
FMA+no data
AVX+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and A8-7680 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and A8-7680. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)Radeon R7

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 1.77
A8-7680 2.29
+29.4%

A8-7680 outperforms A9-9425 by 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A9-9425 1511
A8-7680 3537
+134%

A8-7680 outperforms A9-9425 by 134% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.77 2.29
Recency 31 May 2016 26 October 2018
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 45 Watt

The A8-7680 is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9425 in performance tests.

Be aware that A9-9425 is a notebook processor while A8-7680 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and A8-7680, 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 A8-7680
A8-7680

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 1507 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 480 votes

Rate A8-7680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or A8-7680, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.