Celeron N3160 vs A6-9225

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-9225
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.84
+10.5%
Celeron N3160
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.76

A6-9225 outperforms Celeron N3160 by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25852660
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Celeron
Power efficiency5.3017.98
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Braswell (2015−2016)
Release date1 June 2018 (6 years ago)15 January 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Detailed specifications

A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.6 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz2.24 GHz
Bus typeno dataIDI
L1 cache160 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB2 MB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C90 °C
Number of transistors1200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketBGAFCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N3160. 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, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRANDno data
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Smart Connectno data-
HD Audiono data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Bootno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Identity Protection-+
OS Guardno data-
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
VT-ino data-
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N3160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 686 MHz)Intel HD Graphics (Braswell) (320 - 640 MHz)
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data640 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N3160 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data+
OpenGLno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N3160.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.

A6-9225 0.84
+10.5%
Celeron N3160 0.76

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.

A6-9225 1334
+11%
Celeron N3160 1202

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.

A6-9225 271
+59.4%
Celeron N3160 170

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.

A6-9225 453
Celeron N3160 517
+14.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.84 0.76
Integrated graphics card 1.17 0.62
Recency 1 June 2018 15 January 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

A6-9225 has a 10.5% higher aggregate performance score, 88.7% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 2 years.

Celeron N3160, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The A6-9225 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3160 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9225 and Celeron N3160, 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 A6-9225
A6-9225
Intel Celeron N3160
Celeron N3160

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.


3.5 2301 vote

Rate A6-9225 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 195 votes

Rate Celeron N3160 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-9225 or Celeron N3160, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.