A6-9225 vs Ryzen 9 PRO 7945

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945
2023
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
31.25
+3492%

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 outperforms A6-9225 by a whopping 3492% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1382564
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency43.845.29
Architecture codenameRaphael (2023−2024)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date13 June 2023 (1 year ago)1 June 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225 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 cores12 (Dodeca-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads242
Base clock speed3.7 GHz2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed5.4 GHz3.1 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)160 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache64 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography5 nm28 nm
Die size2x 71 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)47 °Cno data
Number of transistors13,140 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225 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
SocketAM5BGA
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225. 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++
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225. 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
AMD Radeon GraphicsAMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225.

PCIe version5.0no data
PCI Express lanes24no 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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 31.25
+3492%
A6-9225 0.87

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.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 47830
+3494%
A6-9225 1331

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 2905
+972%
A6-9225 271

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 16049
+3443%
A6-9225 453

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.25 0.87
Integrated graphics card 1.98 1.17
Recency 13 June 2023 1 June 2018
Physical cores 12 2
Threads 24 2
Chip lithography 5 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 has a 3492% higher aggregate performance score, 69.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

A6-9225, on the other hand, has 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-9225 in performance tests.

Be aware that Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 is a server/workstation processor while A6-9225 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 and A6-9225, 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.


AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 7945
Ryzen 9 PRO 7945
AMD A6-9225
A6-9225

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.


4.6 22 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2289 votes

Rate A6-9225 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 PRO 7945 or A6-9225, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.