A9-9425 vs Athlon X4 840

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 840
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.17
+21.2%

Athlon X4 840 outperforms A9-9425 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18692025
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Series4x AthlonAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency3.0410.88
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release dateAugust 2014 (10 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cache256K128K (per core)
L2 cache4 MB1 MB (per core)
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size245 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C74 °C
Number of transistors2,411 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425 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
SocketSocket FM2+FT4
Power consumption (TDP)65 watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, 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++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Athlon X4 840 2.17
+21.2%
A9-9425 1.79

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.

Athlon X4 840 3325
+120%
A9-9425 1513

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.

Athlon X4 840 446
+39.4%
A9-9425 320

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.

Athlon X4 840 1109
+130%
A9-9425 482

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.17 1.79
Recency on August 2014 31 May 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

Athlon X4 840 has a 21.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A9-9425, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Athlon X4 840 is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9425 in performance tests.

Note that Athlon X4 840 is a desktop processor while A9-9425 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 840 and A9-9425, 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 Athlon X4 840
Athlon X4 840
AMD A9-9425
A9-9425

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.


3.8 613 votes

Rate Athlon X4 840 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1522 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon X4 840 or A9-9425, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.