Celeron M 380 vs A9-9425

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing A9-9425 and Celeron M 380 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2029not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeCeleron M
Power efficiency10.87no data
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Dothan (2004−2005)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A9-9425 and Celeron M 380 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rateno data400 MHz
L1 cache128K (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)no data
L3 cacheno data1 MB L2 KB
Chip lithography28 nm90 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.004V-1.292V

Compatibility

Information on A9-9425 and Celeron M 380 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
SocketFT4PPGA478, H-PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt21 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Celeron M 380. 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-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data32 Bit
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A9-9425 and Celeron M 380 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Celeron M 380 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Celeron M 380. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)no 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.



wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

A9-9425 25.83
+330%
Celeron M 380 111

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 21 Watt

A9-9425 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between A9-9425 and Celeron M 380. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Celeron M 380, 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 A9-9425
A9-9425
Intel Celeron M 380
Celeron M 380

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 1533 votes

Rate A9-9425 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 9 votes

Rate Celeron M 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A9-9425 or Celeron M 380, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.