Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 vs A9-9425
Aggregate performance score
A9-9425 outperforms Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 by a whopping 268% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2043 | 2924 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | 2x AMD Turion Ultra |
| Power efficiency | 10.91 | 1.39 |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Puma (2008−2009) |
| Release date | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) | 3 June 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 3600 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 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 | S1g2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 32 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80. 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 | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| PowerNow | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 900 MHz) | 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.
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.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.73 | 0.47 |
| Recency | 31 May 2016 | 3 June 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 32 Watt |
A9-9425 has a 268.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 113.3% lower power consumption.
The A9-9425 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A9-9425 and Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80, 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.
