AMD A9-9400 SoC vs AMD A4-7210
Comparative analysis of AMD A9-9400 SoC and AMD A4-7210 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization, Graphics, Graphics interfaces, Graphics API support, Peripherals. Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD A9-9400 SoC
- CPU is newer: launch date 0 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 9% higher clock speed: 2.4 GHz vs 2.2 GHz
- 6.5x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 65% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1199 vs 726
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 894 vs 653
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1799 vs 1417
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 5100 vs 3899
- Around 37% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 894 vs 653
- Around 27% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1799 vs 1417
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 5100 vs 3899
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | May 2016 vs 7 May 2015 |
| Maximum frequency | 2.4 GHz vs 2.2 GHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 65 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1199 vs 726 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 894 vs 653 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1799 vs 1417 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 5100 vs 3899 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 894 vs 653 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1799 vs 1417 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 5100 vs 3899 |
Reasons to consider the AMD A4-7210
- 2 more cores, run more applications at once: 4 vs 2
- Around 25% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 1660 vs 1332
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Number of cores | 4 vs 2 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 1660 vs 1332 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD A9-9400 SoC
CPU 2: AMD A4-7210
| PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD A9-9400 SoC | AMD A4-7210 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1199 | 726 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 1332 | 1660 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.759 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 49.738 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.848 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 21.079 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 894 | 653 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1799 | 1417 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 5100 | 3899 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 894 | 653 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1799 | 1417 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 5100 | 3899 |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 243 | |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 720 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD A9-9400 SoC | AMD A4-7210 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge | Carrizo-L |
| Launch date | May 2016 | 7 May 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 1542 | 1957 |
| Vertical segment | Desktop | All-in-One |
| Family | AMD A-Series Processors | |
| OPN Tray | AM7210ITJ44JB | |
| Series | AMD A4-Series APU for AIOs | |
Performance |
||
| 64 bit support | ||
| Die size | 124 mm | |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB (per core) | 2 MB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | |
| Maximum frequency | 2.4 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 | 4 |
| Transistor count | 1200 million | 930 Million |
| Base frequency | 1.8 GHz | |
| Maximum core temperature | 90°C | |
| Number of threads | 4 | |
| Unlocked | ||
Memory |
||
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3L |
| Max memory channels | 1 | |
| Supported memory frequency | 1600 MHz | |
Compatibility |
||
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Sockets supported | FP4 | |
Advanced Technologies |
||
| Fused Multiply-Add (FMA) | ||
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| AMD App Acceleration | ||
| AMD Elite Experiences | ||
| AMD HD3D technology | ||
| Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) | ||
| Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4) | ||
| PowerGating | ||
| PowerNow | ||
| VirusProtect | ||
Virtualization |
||
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | ||
| IOMMU 2.0 | ||
Graphics |
||
| Enduro | ||
| Graphics max frequency | 686 MHz | |
| Processor graphics | AMD Radeon R3 Graphics | |
| Switchable graphics | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Codec Engine (VCE) | ||
Graphics interfaces |
||
| DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
Graphics API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Peripherals |
||
| PCI Express revision | 2.0 | |
Navigation
Choose a CPU
Compare processors
Compare AMD A9-9400 SoC with others
AMDA9-9400 SoC vs
AMDPhenom II X4 830
AMDA9-9400 SoC vs
IntelCeleron G1850
AMDA9-9400 SoC vs
AMDRyzen 5 1500X
AMDA9-9400 SoC vs
IntelPentium Gold G5500
AMDA9-9400 SoC vs
IntelCore i3-3250T
AMDA9-9400 SoC vs
AMDA8-7500
