Atom 230 vs A9-9425

VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.73
+1473%
Atom 230
2008
1 core / 2 threads, 4 Watt
0.11

A9-9425 outperforms Atom 230 by a whopping 1473% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Atom 230 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20433376
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Atom
Power efficiency10.912.60
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Silverthorne (2008−2010)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)2 April 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$29

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Atom 230 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads22
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz0.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataFSB
Bus rateno data533.33 MT/s
Multiplierno data12
L1 cache128K (per core)56 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm45 nm
Die size124.5 mm225.9638 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C85 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million47 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.9V-1.1625V

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Atom 230 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFT4PBGA437
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt4 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Atom 230. 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, RDRANDIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE3
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Atom 230 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Atom 230 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Atom 230. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 900 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
+1473%
Atom 230 0.11

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
+795%
Atom 230 169

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

A9-9425 2686
+382%
Atom 230 557

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

A9-9425 4338
+410%
Atom 230 851

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 0.11
Recency 31 May 2016 2 April 2008
Physical cores 2 1
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 4 Watt

A9-9425 has a 1472.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 100% more physical cores, and a 60.7% more advanced lithography process.

Atom 230, on the other hand, has 275% lower power consumption.

The A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom 230 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Atom 230, 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
Intel Atom 230
Atom 230

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
3.2 56 votes

Rate Atom 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or Atom 230, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.