A9-9420e vs A6-3400M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
+7.1%
A9-9420e
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.70

A6-3400M outperforms A9-9420e by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and A9-9420e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26532705
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency2.034.42
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 June 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.4 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.3 GHzno data
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size228 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M 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 configuration1no data
SocketFS1BGA
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and A9-9420e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480GVirtualization,

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and A9-9420e are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and A9-9420e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)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.

A6-3400M 0.75
+7.1%
A9-9420e 0.70

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.

A6-3400M 1191
+7.6%
A9-9420e 1107

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.70
Integrated graphics card 0.78 1.48
Recency 14 June 2011 1 June 2018
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

A6-3400M has a 7.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A9-9420e, on the other hand, has 89.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-3400M and A9-9420e.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and A9-9420e, 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 A6-3400M
A6-3400M
AMD A9-9420e
A9-9420e

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.


3.6 172 votes

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 149 votes

Rate A9-9420e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or A9-9420e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.