Core 2 Duo T9400 vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.77
+172%

A9-9425 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9400 by a whopping 172% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19302655
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Core 2 Duo
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)15 July 2008 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$316
Current price$561 $310 (1x MSRP)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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 GHz2.53 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.53 GHz
Bus supportno data1066 MHz
L1 cache128K (per core)128 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)6 MB
L3 cacheno data6 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography28 nm45 nm
Die size124.5 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo
VID voltage rangeno data1.05V-1.162V

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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 configuration1no data
SocketFT4BGA479,BGA956,PBGA479,PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400. 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
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400 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 Core 2 Duo T9400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)no data

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
+172%
Core 2 Duo T9400 0.65

A9-9425 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9400 by 172% 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
+50.2%
Core 2 Duo T9400 1006

A9-9425 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9400 by 50% 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
+0.9%
Core 2 Duo T9400 317

A9-9425 outperforms Core 2 Duo T9400 by 1% 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
Core 2 Duo T9400 496
+2.9%

Core 2 Duo T9400 outperforms A9-9425 by 3% 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
Core 2 Duo T9400 2818
+4.9%

Core 2 Duo T9400 outperforms A9-9425 by 5% 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
Core 2 Duo T9400 5268
+21.4%

Core 2 Duo T9400 outperforms A9-9425 by 21% 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
+0.4%
Core 2 Duo T9400 2304

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
+20%
Core 2 Duo T9400 31

Core 2 Duo T9400 outperforms A9-9425 by 20% in wPrime 32.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.77 0.65
Recency 31 May 2016 15 July 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

The A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo T9400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Core 2 Duo T9400, 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 Core 2 Duo T9400
Core 2 Duo T9400

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 1509 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 116 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or Core 2 Duo T9400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.