A9-9410 vs i7-940XM

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-940XM
2010
4 cores / 8 threads, 55 Watt
1.44
+45.5%

Core i7-940XM outperforms A9-9410 by a considerable 45% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22102488
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i7AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency2.396.02
Architecture codenameClarksfield (2009−2010)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date20 June 2010 (14 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,096no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 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)
Threads82
Base clock speed2.13 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.33 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size296 mm2125 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors774 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 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
SocketFCPGA988,PGA988FP4
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-940XM and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2Virtualization,
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology+no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE36 Bitno data

Security technologies

Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-940XM and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1066, DDR3-1333DDR4-2133
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels21
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardNoneAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data3
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i7-940XM and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-940XM and A9-9410.

PCIe version23.0
PCI Express lanes168

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.

i7-940XM 1.44
+45.5%
A9-9410 0.99

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.

i7-940XM 2209
+45.1%
A9-9410 1522

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.

i7-940XM 3630
+34.7%
A9-9410 2694

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.

i7-940XM 11391
+147%
A9-9410 4619

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.

i7-940XM 4064
+65.5%
A9-9410 2455

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.

i7-940XM 25.18
A9-9410 23.95
+5.1%

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.

i7-940XM 4
+142%
A9-9410 2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.44 0.99
Recency 20 June 2010 31 May 2016
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 8 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 15 Watt

i7-940XM has a 45.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads.

A9-9410, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 266.7% lower power consumption.

The Core i7-940XM is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-940XM and A9-9410, 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.


Intel Core i7-940XM
Core i7-940XM
AMD A9-9410
A9-9410

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.


3.2 63 votes

Rate Core i7-940XM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 113 votes

Rate A9-9410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-940XM or A9-9410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.