A9-9425 vs Celeron G3900E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900E
2016, $107
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.15

A9-9425 outperforms Celeron G3900E by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25712314
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.18no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency3.5311.10
DesignerIntelAMD
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date2 January 2016 (9 years ago)31 May 2016 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900E 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier24no data
L1 cache128 KB128K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size98.57 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors1750 Million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900E 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
Socketno dataFT4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900E 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-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900E and A9-9425 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3900E and A9-9425. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesLPDDR3-1866DDR4
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 510AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 900 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900E and A9-9425.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

Celeron G3900E 1.15
A9-9425 1.55
+34.8%

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

Celeron G3900E 2034
+33.9%
Samples: 1
A9-9425 1519
Samples: 530

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.15 1.55
Integrated graphics card 1.48 1.33
Recency 2 January 2016 31 May 2016
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron G3900E has 11.3% faster integrated GPU, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

A9-9425, on the other hand, has a 34.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The AMD A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron G3900E in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron G3900E
Celeron G3900E
AMD A9-9425
A9-9425

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2 1 vote

Rate Celeron G3900E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1582 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Celeron G3900E and A9-9425, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.