A9-9410 vs m3-6Y30

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core m3-6Y30
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
1.37
+42.7%
A9-9410
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.96

Core m3-6Y30 outperforms A9-9410 by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22452505
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core m3AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency25.956.06
Architecture codenameSkylake-Y (2015)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$281no data

Detailed specifications

Core m3-6Y30 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed0.9 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier9no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size98.57 mm2125 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors1750 Million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core m3-6Y30 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketFCBGA1515FP4
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2Virtualization,
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Smart Response+no data

Security technologies

Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core m3-6Y30 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 m3-6Y30 and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2133
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels21
Maximum memory bandwidth29.861 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 515AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data3
Max video memory16 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+
Graphics max frequency850 MHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over VGAN/Ano data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12DirectX® 12
OpenGL4.5no data
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core m3-6Y30 and A9-9410.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes108

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.

m3-6Y30 1.37
+42.7%
A9-9410 0.96

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.

m3-6Y30 2170
+42%
A9-9410 1528

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.

m3-6Y30 3388
+25.7%
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.

m3-6Y30 7158
+55%
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.

m3-6Y30 2780
+13.2%
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.

m3-6Y30 24.1
A9-9410 23.95
+0.6%

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.

m3-6Y30 2
+43.4%
A9-9410 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

m3-6Y30 204
+56.9%
A9-9410 130

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.

m3-6Y30 86
+35.7%
A9-9410 63

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.

m3-6Y30 0.99
+20.7%
A9-9410 0.82

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.

m3-6Y30 1.2
+20%
A9-9410 1

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.

m3-6Y30 1725
+96.2%
A9-9410 879

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.  

m3-6Y30 13
+31.3%
A9-9410 10

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.  

m3-6Y30 73
+36.3%
A9-9410 54

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

m3-6Y30 4498
+36.3%
A9-9410 3299

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

m3-6Y30 2420
+13.4%
A9-9410 2134

Geekbench 2

m3-6Y30 5417
+27.2%
A9-9410 4260

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core

m3-6Y30 5140
+61.5%
A9-9410 3182

Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core

m3-6Y30 2762
+29.5%
A9-9410 2133

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.37 0.96
Recency 1 September 2015 31 May 2016
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 15 Watt

m3-6Y30 has a 42.7% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.

A9-9410, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months.

The Core m3-6Y30 is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core m3-6Y30 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 m3-6Y30
Core m3-6Y30
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.


3.6 73 votes

Rate Core m3-6Y30 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 115 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 m3-6Y30 or A9-9410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.