A9-9420e vs A10-6800K
Aggregate performance score
A10-6800K outperforms A9-9420e by a whopping 187% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A10-6800K and A9-9420e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1918 | 2704 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.26 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Power efficiency | 1.89 | 4.40 |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 1 June 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 June 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $142 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A10-6800K and A9-9420e 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 4.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.4 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 124.5 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,303 million | 1200 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on A10-6800K and A9-9420e 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 | no data |
| Socket | FM2 | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-6800K and A9-9420e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Virtualization, |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-6800K and A9-9420e are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-6800K and A9-9420e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-2133 | DDR4 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 8670D | AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) |
| Number of pipelines | 384 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A10-6800K and A9-9420e integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A10-6800K and A9-9420e integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-6800K and A9-9420e.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.01 | 0.70 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.38 | 1.48 |
| Recency | 1 June 2013 | 1 June 2018 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
A10-6800K has a 187.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
A9-9420e, on the other hand, has 7.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 566.7% lower power consumption.
The A10-6800K is our recommended choice as it beats the A9-9420e in performance tests.
Note that A10-6800K is a desktop processor while A9-9420e is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-6800K and A9-9420e, 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.
