Ryzen 3 3200G vs A9-9400 SoC
Primary details
Comparing A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1315 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 29 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 8.90 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | AMD Ryzen 3 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 6.54 |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Picasso (2019−2022) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 7 July 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G 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 | 2.4 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 4 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Die size | 125 mm2 | 210 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 4,940 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FT4 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 46.933 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R5 3CU | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 7 July 2019 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 65 Watt |
A9-9400 SoC has 550% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 3 3200G, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9400 SoC and Ryzen 3 3200G, 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.
