A9-9410 vs 3015Ce

VS

Aggregate performance score

3015Ce
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.32
+37.5%
A9-9410
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.96

3015Ce outperforms A9-9410 by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing 3015Ce and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22522493
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency20.826.06
Architecture codenamePollock (Zen) (2020)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date4 August 2020 (4 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

3015Ce 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.2 GHz2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz3.5 GHz
L1 cache192 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB2048 KB
L3 cache4 MBno data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data125 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on 3015Ce 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT5FP4
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by 3015Ce and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMEVirtualization,
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by 3015Ce and A9-9410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by 3015Ce and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4-2133
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data3
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of 3015Ce and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by 3015Ce and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by 3015Ce and A9-9410.

PCIe versionno data3.0
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.

3015Ce 1.32
+37.5%
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.

3015Ce 2099
+37.9%
A9-9410 1522

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.32 0.96
Recency 4 August 2020 31 May 2016
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 15 Watt

3015Ce has a 37.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The 3015Ce is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9410 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between 3015Ce 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 3015Ce
3015Ce
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.


3.2 19 votes

Rate 3015Ce on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 113 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 3015Ce or A9-9410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.