Core 2 Quad Q9000 vs A9-9425

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.73
+74.7%
Core 2 Quad Q9000
2009
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
0.99

A9-9425 outperforms Core 2 Quad Q9000 by an impressive 75% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20432477
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Core 2 Quad
Power efficiency10.912.08
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)1 January 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$348

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2 GHz
Bus rateno data1066 MHz
L1 cache128K (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)6 MB
L3 cache0 KB6 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography28 nm45 nm
Die size124.5 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.05V-1.175V

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000 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
SocketFT4PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000. 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, RDRANDno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000 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 Quad Q9000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000. 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) ( - 900 MHz)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 1.73
+74.7%
Core 2 Quad Q9000 0.99

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
Core 2 Quad Q9000 1575
+4.1%

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
+16.8%
Core 2 Quad Q9000 274

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
Core 2 Quad Q9000 677
+40.5%

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
+12.1%
Core 2 Quad Q9000 2396

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
Core 2 Quad Q9000 8008
+84.6%

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.

A9-9425 2314
Core 2 Quad Q9000 2863
+23.7%

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.

A9-9425 25.83
Core 2 Quad Q9000 20.25
+27.6%

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.

A9-9425 2
Core 2 Quad Q9000 2
+58%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 0.99
Recency 31 May 2016 1 January 2009
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 45 Watt

A9-9425 has a 74.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

Core 2 Quad Q9000, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Quad Q9000 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Core 2 Quad Q9000, 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 Quad Q9000
Core 2 Quad Q9000

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
4.9 533 votes

Rate Core 2 Quad Q9000 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 Quad Q9000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.