A12-9720P vs Ultra 7 155H

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core Ultra 7 155H
2023
16 cores / 22 threads, 28 Watt
15.81
+847%
A12-9720P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.67

Core Ultra 7 155H outperforms A12-9720P by a whopping 847% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking4332070
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Meteor Lake-HAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency53.4010.53
Architecture codenameMeteor Lake-H (2023)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date14 December 2023 (1 year ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$503no data

Detailed specifications

Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P 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 cores16 (Hexadeca-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads224
Base clock speed3.8 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed4.8 GHz3.6 GHz
L1 cache112 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache2 MB (per core)2 MB
L3 cache24 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography7 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data250 mm2
Maximum core temperature110 °C90 °C
Number of transistorsno data3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P 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
SocketIntel BGA 2049FP4
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
TSX+-

Security technologies

Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR5DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel Arc 8-Cores iGPU ( - 2250 MHz)AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 758 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P.

PCIe version5.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no 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.

Ultra 7 155H 15.81
+847%
A12-9720P 1.67

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.

Ultra 7 155H 25119
+846%
A12-9720P 2656

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.

Ultra 7 155H 9828
+258%
A12-9720P 2743

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.

Ultra 7 155H 56242
+664%
A12-9720P 7361

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.

Ultra 7 155H 3.61
+260%
A12-9720P 13.01

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ultra 7 155H 30
+1031%
A12-9720P 3

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ultra 7 155H 2385
+917%
A12-9720P 235

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ultra 7 155H 255
+252%
A12-9720P 73

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ultra 7 155H 3.07
+227%
A12-9720P 0.94

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ultra 7 155H 10.2
+467%
A12-9720P 1.8

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.81 1.67
Integrated graphics card 18.48 1.96
Recency 14 December 2023 1 June 2016
Physical cores 16 4
Threads 22 4
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 15 Watt

Ultra 7 155H has a 846.7% higher aggregate performance score, 842.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 450% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

A12-9720P, on the other hand, has 86.7% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 7 155H is our recommended choice as it beats the A12-9720P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core Ultra 7 155H and A12-9720P, 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 Core Ultra 7 155H
Core Ultra 7 155H
AMD A12-9720P
A12-9720P

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.


3.8 561 vote

Rate Core Ultra 7 155H on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 437 votes

Rate A12-9720P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core Ultra 7 155H or A12-9720P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.