A6-9225 vs Apple M4 Max (16 cores)
Aggregate performance score
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) outperforms A6-9225 by a whopping 3243% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing M4 Max (16 cores) and A6-9225 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 171 | 2600 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Apple M4 | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Power efficiency | 29.42 | 5.28 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 30 October 2024 (less than a year ago) | 1 June 2018 (6 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
M4 Max (16 cores) and A6-9225 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 cores | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.51 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | no data | 124.5 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1200 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on M4 Max (16 cores) and A6-9225 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.
| Socket | no data | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M4 Max (16 cores) and A6-9225. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M4 Max (16 cores) and A6-9225. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Apple M4 40-core GPU | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 686 MHz) |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 27.75 | 0.83 |
| Recency | 30 October 2024 | 1 June 2018 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 2 |
| Threads | 16 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 15 Watt |
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) has a 3243.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.
A6-9225, on the other hand, has 500% lower power consumption.
The M4 Max (16 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-9225 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and A6-9225, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
