Celeron M 560 vs A9-9425
Primary details
Comparing A9-9425 and Celeron M 560 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2031 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | Intel Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 10.91 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 1 May 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A9-9425 and Celeron M 560 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 | 2.13 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 533 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | 143 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A9-9425 and Celeron M 560 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 | no data |
| Socket | FT4 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 30 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Celeron M 560. 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 Celeron M 560 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Celeron M 560. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD 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.
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.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 1 May 2008 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 30 Watt |
A9-9425 has an age advantage of 8 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A9-9425 and Celeron M 560. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Celeron M 560, 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.
