A6-9400 vs i5-2400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-2400
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.43
+42.1%
A6-9400
2019
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
1.71

Core i5-2400 outperforms A6-9400 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-2400 and A6-9400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking17592040
Place by popularity39not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.86no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore i5 (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency2.422.49
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date9 January 2011 (13 years ago)16 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$60no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i5-2400 and A6-9400 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.1 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz3.7 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)160K
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (shared)
L3 cache6144 KB (shared)no data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size216 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature73 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,160 million3,100 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-2400 and A6-9400 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 configuration11
SocketLGA1155AM4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-2400 and A6-9400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Core i5-2400 and A6-9400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Identity Protection+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-2400 and A6-9400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-2400 and A6-9400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2400
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 2000Radeon R5
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-2400 and A6-9400 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-2400 and A6-9400.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanes168

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.

i5-2400 2.43
+42.1%
A6-9400 1.71

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.

i5-2400 3867
+42.3%
A6-9400 2717

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.43 1.71
Recency 9 January 2011 16 March 2019
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

i5-2400 has a 42.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A6-9400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

The Core i5-2400 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-9400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-2400 and A6-9400, 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 i5-2400
Core i5-2400
AMD A6-9400
A6-9400

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.


3.7 3359 votes

Rate Core i5-2400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 26 votes

Rate A6-9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-2400 or A6-9400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.