Athlon II M340 vs A9-9425
Aggregate performance score
A9-9425 outperforms Athlon II M340 by a whopping 239% 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 | 2288 | 3149 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | AMD Athlon II |
| Power efficiency | 4.41 | 0.56 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Caspian (2009) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 10 September 2009 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A9-9425 and Athlon II M340 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 3200 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A9-9425 and Athlon II M340 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 | no data |
| Socket | FT4 | Socket S1 (S1g3) |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Athlon II M340. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| PowerNow | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Athlon II M340 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Athlon II M340. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 900 MHz) | no data |
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 | 1.56 | 0.46 |
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 10 September 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 35 Watt |
A9-9425 has a 239.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.
The AMD A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon II M340 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
