Celeron G6900 vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.77
Celeron G6900
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 46 Watt
2.94
+66.1%

Celeron G6900 outperforms A9-9425 by an impressive 66% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19911628
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Alder Lake-S (2022)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 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 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 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
SocketFT4FCLGA1700
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt46 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Celeron G6900. 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® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
TSX-+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Statusno dataLaunched
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Celeron G6900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR5-4800, DDR4-3200
Maximum memory sizeno data128 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data76.8 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)Intel UHD Graphics 710
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.3 GHz
Execution Unitsno data16

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data4

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160 @ 60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data5120 x 3200 @ 120Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A9-9425 and Celeron G6900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.5

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and Celeron G6900.

PCIe versionno data5.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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
Celeron G6900 2.94
+66.1%

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 1509
Celeron G6900 4550
+202%

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
Celeron G6900 1706
+433%

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
Celeron G6900 2808
+483%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.77 2.94
Integrated graphics card 1.45 2.85
Recency 1 June 2016 4 January 2022
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 46 Watt

A9-9425 has 206.7% lower power consumption.

Celeron G6900, on the other hand, has a 66.1% higher aggregate performance score, 96.6% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 5 years.

The Celeron G6900 is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9425 in performance tests.

Be aware that A9-9425 is a notebook processor while Celeron G6900 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Celeron G6900, 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 Celeron G6900
Celeron G6900

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 1516 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 162 votes

Rate Celeron G6900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or Celeron G6900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.