A9-9410 vs PRO A12-8870

VS

Aggregate performance score

PRO A12-8870
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.45
+155%
A9-9410
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.96

PRO A12-8870 outperforms A9-9410 by a whopping 155% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking17692503
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency3.576.06
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release dateOctober 2016 (8 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

PRO A12-8870 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)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.7 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz3.5 GHz
L2 cache2048 KB2048 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size250 mm2125 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors3,100 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on PRO A12-8870 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
SocketAM4FP4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC++
FreeSync++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR4-2133
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core count83
Enduron/a+
Switchable graphics++
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortn/a+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Vulkan++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by PRO A12-8870 and A9-9410.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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.

PRO A12-8870 2.45
+155%
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.

PRO A12-8870 3888
+154%
A9-9410 1528

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.45 0.96
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

PRO A12-8870 has a 155.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A9-9410, on the other hand, has 333.3% lower power consumption.

The PRO A12-8870 is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.

Note that PRO A12-8870 is a desktop processor while A9-9410 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between PRO A12-8870 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.


AMD PRO A12-8870
PRO A12-8870
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.


3.3 216 votes

Rate PRO A12-8870 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 PRO A12-8870 or A9-9410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.