AMD A9-9400 SoC vs Intel Core i5-2520M
Comparative analysis of AMD A9-9400 SoC and Intel Core i5-2520M processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization, Graphics, Graphics interfaces, Peripherals, Security & Reliability. 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD A9-9400 SoC
- CPU is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 28 nm vs 32 nm
- 2x more L1 cache, more data can be stored in the L1 cache for quick access later
- 4x more L2 cache, more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
- 3.5x lower typical power consumption: 10 Watt vs 35 Watt
- Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 2.759 vs 1.877
- Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 49.738 vs 30.827
- 13.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 11.848 vs 0.881
- 10.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 21.079 vs 2.055
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | May 2016 vs 20 February 2011 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 32 nm |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) vs 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB (per core) vs 512 KB |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt vs 35 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.759 vs 1.877 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 49.738 vs 30.827 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.848 vs 0.881 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 21.079 vs 2.055 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Core i5-2520M
- Around 33% higher clock speed: 3.20 GHz vs 2.4 GHz
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1360 vs 1199
- Around 69% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 2248 vs 1332
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Maximum frequency | 3.20 GHz vs 2.4 GHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1360 vs 1199 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 2248 vs 1332 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD A9-9400 SoC
CPU 2: Intel Core i5-2520M
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | AMD A9-9400 SoC | Intel Core i5-2520M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1199 | 1360 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 1332 | 2248 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 2.759 | 1.877 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 49.738 | 30.827 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 11.848 | 0.881 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 21.079 | 2.055 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 894 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1799 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 5100 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 894 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1799 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 5100 | |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 542 | |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 1187 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.217 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD A9-9400 SoC | Intel Core i5-2520M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge | Sandy Bridge |
| Launch date | May 2016 | 20 February 2011 |
| Place in performance rating | 1542 | 2845 |
| Vertical segment | Desktop | Mobile |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $225 | |
| Price now | $169.60 | |
| Processor Number | i5-2520M | |
| Series | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors | |
| Status | Launched | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 6.23 | |
Performance |
||
| 64 bit support | ||
| Die size | 124 mm | 149 mm |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | |
| Maximum frequency | 2.4 GHz | 3.20 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 | 2 |
| Transistor count | 1200 million | 624 Million |
| Base frequency | 2.50 GHz | |
| Bus Speed | 5 GT/s DMI | |
| L3 cache | 3072 KB | |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 C | |
| Number of threads | 4 | |
Memory |
||
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 1066/1333 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21.3 GB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | |
Compatibility |
||
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Package Size | 37.5mm x 37.5mm (rPGA988B); 31mm x 24mm (BGA1023) | |
| Sockets supported | PPGA988 | |
Advanced Technologies |
||
| Fused Multiply-Add (FMA) | ||
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| 4G WiMAX Wireless | ||
| Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® technology | ||
| Flexible Display interface (FDI) | ||
| Idle States | ||
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® AVX | |
| Intel 64 | ||
| Intel® Demand Based Switching | ||
| Intel® Fast Memory Access | ||
| Intel® Flex Memory Access | ||
| Intel® Hyper-Threading technology | ||
| Intel® My WiFi technology | ||
| Intel® Turbo Boost technology | ||
| Intel® vPro™ Platform Eligibility | ||
| Thermal Monitoring | ||
Virtualization |
||
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) | ||
| Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT) | ||
Graphics |
||
| Device ID | 0x116 | |
| Graphics base frequency | 650 MHz | |
| Graphics max dynamic frequency | 1.30 GHz | |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.3 GHz | |
| Intel® Clear Video HD technology | ||
| Intel® Flexible Display Interface (Intel® FDI) | ||
| Intel® InTru™ 3D technology | ||
| Intel® Quick Sync Video | ||
| Processor graphics | Intel® HD Graphics 3000 | |
Graphics interfaces |
||
| CRT | ||
| DisplayPort | ||
| eDP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Number of displays supported | 2 | |
| SDVO | ||
| Wireless Display (WiDi) support | ||
Peripherals |
||
| Max number of PCIe lanes | 16 | |
| PCI Express revision | 2.0 | |
| PCIe configurations | 1x16, 2x8, 1x8+2x4 | |
Security & Reliability |
||
| Anti-Theft technology | ||
| Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
| Intel® Identity Protection technology | ||
| Intel® Trusted Execution technology (TXT) | ||
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
