A9-9425 vs Phenom II X3 P840
Aggregate performance score
A9-9425 outperforms Phenom II X3 P840 by a whopping 111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X3 P840 and A9-9425 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2580 | 2029 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 3x AMD Phenom II | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Power efficiency | 3.10 | 10.91 |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 4 October 2010 (14 years ago) | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X3 P840 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 cores | 3 (Tri-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 128K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1.5 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | no data | 124.5 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 74 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X3 P840 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | S1 | FT4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X3 P840 and A9-9425. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Virtualization, AMD64, Advanced Virus Protection, SSE(1,2,3,4a) | MMX, 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 | - | + |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X3 P840 and A9-9425 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X3 P840 and A9-9425. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.82 | 1.73 |
| Recency | 4 October 2010 | 31 May 2016 |
| Physical cores | 3 | 2 |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 15 Watt |
Phenom II X3 P840 has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
A9-9425, on the other hand, has a 111% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.
The A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X3 P840 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X3 P840 and A9-9425, 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.
