Ultra 7 256V vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.76
Core Ultra 7 256V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 17 Watt
12.39
+604%

Core Ultra 7 256V outperforms A9-9425 by a whopping 604% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2029631
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Power efficiency10.9067.69
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads28
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4.8 GHz
Bus rateno data37 MHz
L1 cache128K (per core)192 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm3 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V 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
SocketFT4Intel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt17 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V. 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+
TSX-+

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V 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 Core Ultra 7 256V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)Arc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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 1.76
Ultra 7 256V 12.39
+604%

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
Ultra 7 256V 19320
+1177%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.76 12.39
Recency 31 May 2016 24 September 2024
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 28 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 17 Watt

A9-9425 has 13.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 256V, on the other hand, has a 604% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 7 256V is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9425 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Core Ultra 7 256V, 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 Ultra 7 256V
Core Ultra 7 256V

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 1533 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Core Ultra 7 256V 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 Ultra 7 256V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.