Ryzen 7 7840HS vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A9-9425
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.78
Ryzen 7 7840HS
2023
8 cores / 16 threads, 35 Watt
18.75
+953%

Ryzen 7 7840HS outperforms A9-9425 by a whopping 953% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1998315
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Phoenix-HS (Zen 4) (2023)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)5 January 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS 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)
Threads216
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz5.1 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)512 KB
L2 cache1 MB8 MB
L3 cacheno data16 MB
Chip lithography28 nm4 nm
Die size124.5 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1200 Million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS 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
SocketFT4FP7/FP7r2/FP8
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS. 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, RDRANDRyzen AI, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)AMD Radeon 780M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9425 and Ryzen 7 7840HS.

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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 1.78
Ryzen 7 7840HS 18.75
+953%

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 1510
Ryzen 7 7840HS 28916
+1815%

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 7840HS 2371
+641%

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 7840HS 11026
+2188%

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 7840HS 7642
+184%

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 7840HS 47933
+1005%

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 7840HS 15663
+577%

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 7840HS 2.64
+878%

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 7840HS 30
+1899%

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 7840HS 2573
+1958%

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 7840HS 279
+266%

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 7840HS 3.31
+268%

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 7840HS 14.8
+1458%

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 7840HS 7064
+693%

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 7840HS 147
+1412%

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 7840HS 290
+474%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.78 18.75
Integrated graphics card 1.45 18.32
Recency 1 June 2016 5 January 2023
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 16
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

A9-9425 has 133.3% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 7 7840HS, on the other hand, has a 953.4% higher aggregate performance score, 1163.4% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, 300% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 7 7840HS 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 7840HS, 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 7840HS
Ryzen 7 7840HS

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 1516 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 1482 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 7840HS 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 7840HS, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.