Ryzen 7 3750H vs A9-9425

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.73
Ryzen 7 3750H
2019
4 cores / 8 threads, 35 Watt
5.10
+195%

Ryzen 7 3750H outperforms A9-9425 by a whopping 195% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20441219
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD Ryzen 7
Power efficiency10.9113.79
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Picasso (Zen+) (2019)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H 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)
Threads28
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Multiplierno data23
L1 cache128K (per core)128K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm12 nm
Die size124.5 mm2209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million4940 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFT4FP5
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H. 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, RDRANDMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 900 MHz)AMD Radeon RX Vega 10 ( - 1400 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 5.10
+195%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 8097
+435%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 990
+209%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 3076
+538%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 4770
+77.6%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 20687
+377%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 7431
+221%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 7.44
+247%

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
Ryzen 7 3750H 9
+514%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

A9-9425 125
Ryzen 7 3750H 734
+487%

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.

A9-9425 76
Ryzen 7 3750H 144
+89.5%

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.

A9-9425 0.9
Ryzen 7 3750H 1.64
+82.2%

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.

A9-9425 1
Ryzen 7 3750H 5
+426%

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.

A9-9425 891
Ryzen 7 3750H 2866
+222%

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.  

A9-9425 10
Ryzen 7 3750H 49
+401%

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.  

A9-9425 51
Ryzen 7 3750H 139
+176%

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

A9-9425 3323
Ryzen 7 3750H 14749
+344%

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

A9-9425 2039
Ryzen 7 3750H 3768
+84.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 5.10
Integrated graphics card 1.48 4.24
Recency 31 May 2016 6 January 2019
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

A9-9425 has 133.3% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 3750H, on the other hand, has a 194.8% higher aggregate performance score, 186.5% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 3750H is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9425 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 3750H, 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
AMD Ryzen 7 3750H
Ryzen 7 3750H

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 1339 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 3750H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or Ryzen 7 3750H, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.