Athlon II X3 425 vs PRO A8-9600
Aggregate performance score
PRO A8-9600 outperforms Athlon II X3 425 by a whopping 111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1784 | 2362 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 6.94 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Rana (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 3 October 2016 (7 years ago) | October 2009 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $42 |
| Current price | no data | $16.77 (0.4x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 320K | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | 169 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | 300 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R7 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | no 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.
PRO A8-9600 outperforms Athlon II X3 425 by 111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
PRO A8-9600 outperforms Athlon II X3 425 by 111% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.15 | 1.02 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 3 |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
PRO A8-9600 has a 110.8% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.
The PRO A8-9600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X3 425 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between PRO A8-9600 and Athlon II X3 425, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
