Athlon 700 vs A9-9425
Primary details
Comparing A9-9425 and Athlon 700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2029 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | no data |
| Power efficiency | 10.91 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Thunderbird (1999−2000) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 29 November 1999 (24 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $849 |
Detailed specifications
A9-9425 and Athlon 700 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 0.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 180 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | 102 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | 70 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 22 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A9-9425 and Athlon 700 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 |
| Socket | FT4 | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 34 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Athlon 700. 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 | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Athlon 700 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Athlon 700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) | N/A |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 29 November 1999 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 34 Watt |
A9-9425 has an age advantage of 16 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 126.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A9-9425 and Athlon 700. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that A9-9425 is a notebook processor while Athlon 700 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Athlon 700, 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.
