Atom x5-Z8550 vs A6-9225
Aggregate performance score
A6-9225 outperforms Atom x5-Z8550 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2564 | 2670 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | 5x Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 5.29 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Cherry Trail (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 1 June 2018 (6 years ago) | 8 February 2016 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 1.44 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1200 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | BGA | UTFCBGA1380 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | - |
Security technologies
A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) | Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 600 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 3840x2160 |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 2560x1600 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 2 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 3 |
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.87 | 0.76 |
| Recency | 1 June 2018 | 8 February 2016 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
A6-9225 has a 14.5% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.
Atom x5-Z8550, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The A6-9225 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x5-Z8550 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9225 and Atom x5-Z8550, 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.
