Celeron N2820 vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Celeron N2820 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1930not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)1 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107
Current price$561 $215 (2x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Celeron N2820 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 GHz2.13 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.39 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)56K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Celeron N2820 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
SocketFT4FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Celeron N2820. 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+-
FMA+no data
AVX+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued
RSTno data-

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Celeron N2820 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Identity Protectionno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Celeron N2820 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Celeron N2820. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Graphics max frequencyno data756 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A9-9425 and Celeron N2820 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and Celeron N2820.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


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
+201%
Celeron N2820 502

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 201% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A9-9425 320
+61.6%
Celeron N2820 198

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 62% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A9-9425 482
+40.5%
Celeron N2820 343

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 41% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

A9-9425 2686
+153%
Celeron N2820 1061

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 153% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A9-9425 4338
+116%
Celeron N2820 2010

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 116% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A9-9425 2314
+63.2%
Celeron N2820 1418

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 63% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

A9-9425 25.83
+87.8%
Celeron N2820 48.5

Celeron N2820 outperforms A9-9425 by 88% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

A9-9425 2
+117%
Celeron N2820 1

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 117% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A9-9425 125
+116%
Celeron N2820 58

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 116% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A9-9425 76
+101%
Celeron N2820 38

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 101% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

A9-9425 0.9
+150%
Celeron N2820 0.36

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 150% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A9-9425 1
+631%
Celeron N2820 0.1

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 631% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A9-9425 891
+32%
Celeron N2820 675

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 32% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A9-9425 10
+67.2%
Celeron N2820 6

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 67% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A9-9425 51
+90.6%
Celeron N2820 27

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 91% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A9-9425 3323
+114%
Celeron N2820 1553

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 114% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A9-9425 2039
+132%
Celeron N2820 879

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 132% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A9-9425 4518
+109%
Celeron N2820 2165

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron N2820 by 109% in Geekbench 2.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 31 May 2016 1 December 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 7 Watt

We couldn't decide between A9-9425 and Celeron N2820. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Celeron N2820, 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 N2820
Celeron N2820

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 1508 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 43 votes

Rate Celeron N2820 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 N2820, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.