A9-9410 vs Celeron M 550

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 550 and A9-9410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2493
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron MAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiencyno data6.06
Architecture codenameMerom (2006−2008)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)31 May 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 550 and A9-9410 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Base clock speedno data2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.5 GHz
Bus rate533 MHzno data
L2 cacheno data2048 KB
Chip lithography65 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data125 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 550 and A9-9410 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFP4
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 550 and A9-9410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 550 and A9-9410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 550 and A9-9410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4-2133
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data3
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 550 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron M 550 and A9-9410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 550 and A9-9410.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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.

Celeron M 550 465
A9-9410 1522
+227%

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.

Celeron M 550 1834
A9-9410 2694
+46.9%

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.

Celeron M 550 877
A9-9410 2455
+180%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 15 Watt

A9-9410 has 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 Celeron M 550 and A9-9410. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 550 and A9-9410, 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.


Intel Celeron M 550
Celeron M 550
AMD A9-9410
A9-9410

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.


3.1 28 votes

Rate Celeron M 550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 113 votes

Rate A9-9410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 550 or A9-9410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.