Processor AMD A6-9220 Stoney Ridge 2500 MHz
Advantages
General information
Technical specifications
RAM Built-in GPU Advanced technologies
Cinebench tests Geekbench tests Other tests
AMD A6-9220
AMD A6-9220
Number of points: 6044
Intel Core i9-10980XE
Information about the series and architecture of AMD A6-9220, as well as the release date of processor.
Bristol Ridge
Stoney Ridge
AMD A6-9220
2016-06-01
The main technical characteristics of AMD A6-9220 processor.
2
Leader — AMD Epyc 7702 (64)
2
Leader — AMD Epyc 7702 (128)
2500 MHz
Leader — Intel Core i7-10810U 4900 MHz
2900 MHz
Leader — Intel Core i9-10980HK (5300)
Leader — AMD Epyc 7702P (32)
10 W
Leader — AMD Epyc 7h22 (280)
28 nm
Leader — AMD Ryzen 9 3900X (7)
Characteristics of an integrated graphics processing unit.
Support of 4K, clock speed, as well as video core memory capacity.
Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
0.6 GHz
Leader — AMD Ryzen 7 4800H 2 MHz
2 GB
Leader — Intel Xeon E-2176G (128)
AMD A6-9220
Support by processors of such advanced technologies as multithreading, Turbo mode, AES cryptographic algorithm, and x86 AVX command system extension.
AMD A6-9220
AMD A6-9220
AMD A6-9220
AMD A6-9220
AMD A6-9220
Cinebench benchmark is a widely known and free computer performance test (testing a CPU and a video card). The program has been developed based upon MAXON Cinema 4D – a professional application for creating 3D animation.
111.5
Leader — Intel Core i7-6700K (8800)
68.
5
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (216)
1.38
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (41)
0.8
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (2)
3941
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (61667)
2432
Leader — Intel Core i5-8500 (8606)
Geekbench is a synthetic computer performance test. The program performs a number of test tasks that simulate real scenarios that a computer has to deal with in everyday work.
2857
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (55569)
1960
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (6308)
2805
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (35932)
1885
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (6313)
2921
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (80967)
1798
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (4875)
3461
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (43557)
A number of different tests including 3DMark06 CPU, SuperPI, Octane and many others.
2253
Leader — AMD Ryzen 7 2700X (106435)
20.94
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (7)
1021.95
Leader — Intel Core i9-10980XE (410)
27.71
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (2)
914.72
Leader — AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2970WX (38)
770
Leader — Intel Core i7-6950X (8450)
46.5
Leader — Intel Core i9-9900KS (279)
8.
7
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (167)
0.98
Leader — AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2950X (20)
0.19
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (3)
0.12
Leader — Intel Core i9-9980XE (2)
46.5
Leader — Intel Core i7-7740X (50)
14724
Leader — Intel Core i7-7740X (48268)
AMD A6-9220 processor review: CPU specs, performance benchmarks
Buy on Amazon
A6-9220 processor released by AMD; release date: 1 June 2016.
The processor is designed for laptop-computers and based on Stoney Ridge microarchitecture.
CPU is unlocked for overclocking. Total number of cores — 2, threads — 2. Maximum CPU clock speed — 2.9 GHz. Maximum operating temperature — 90°C. Manufacturing process technology — 28 nm. Cache size: L1 — 160 KB, L2 — 1 MB.
Supported memory types: DDR4.
Supported socket types: FP4 BGA. Power consumption (TDP): 15 Watt.
The processor has integrated graphics AMD Radeon R5 Graphics with the following parameters: maximum frequency — 655 MHz, cores count — 3.
Benchmarks
| PassMark Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark CPU mark |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1. 5 DesktopFace Detection |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Ocean Surface Simulation |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Video Composition |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Bitcoin Mining |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4. 0T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex |
|
|
237 Frames/s
000 Fps| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1142 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1288 |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection |
5.922 mPixels/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation | 4.825 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex | 0.075 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition | 10.467 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining | 29.364 mHash/s |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen | 743 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1537 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 4038 Frames |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen |
743.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1537.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 4038.000 Fps |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 388.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 256 |
| Texture fill rate | 12. 13 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2,410 million |
Games performance
1. Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
2. Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
3. Metro Exodus (2019)
4. Far Cry New Dawn (2019)
5. Apex Legends (2019)
6. Just Cause 4 (2018)
7. Darksiders III (2018)
8. Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
9. Hitman 2 (2018)
10.
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
11. Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
12. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
13. F1 2018 (2018)
14. Monster Hunter World (2018)
15. Far Cry 5 (2018)
16. X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
17. Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
18. Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
19. Fortnite (2018)
20. Destiny 2 (2017)
21. ELEX (2017)
22. The Evil Within 2 (2017)
23. Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
24. FIFA 18 (2017)
25.
Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
26. F1 2017 (2017)
27. Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
28. Team Fortress 2 (2017)
29. Dirt 4 (2017)
30. Rocket League (2017)
31. Prey (2017)
32. Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
33. Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
34. For Honor (2017)
35. Resident Evil 7 (2017)
36. Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
37. Civilization VI (2016)
38. Overwatch (2016)
39. Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
40.
Hitman 2016 (2016)
41. The Division (2016)
42. Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
43. Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
44. World of Warships (2015)
45. Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
46. The Witcher 3 (2015)
47. Dirt Rally (2015)
48. Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
49. Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
50. Alien: Isolation (2014)
51. Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
52. Sims 4 (2014)
53. Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
54.
Thief (2014)
55. X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
56. Battlefield 4 (2013)
57. Total War: Rome II (2013)
58. Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
59. Metro: Last Light (2013)
60. BioShock Infinite (2013)
61. StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
62. Tomb Raider (2013)
63. Diablo III (2012)
64. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
65. Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
66. StarCraft 2 (2010)
67. World of Warcraft (2005)
Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 39. 20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.50 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25.00 |
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.90 |
Metro Exodus (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Far Cry New Dawn (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 2.00 |
Apex Legends (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Just Cause 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.30 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Darksiders III (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 22.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 11. 80 |
Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 39.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 14.00 |
Hitman 2 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3.50 |
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.00 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
F1 2018 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 12.00 |
Monster Hunter World (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4. 00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
Far Cry 5 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.70 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.40 |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3.00 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.10 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Fortnite (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Destiny 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.00 |
ELEX (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6. 00 |
The Evil Within 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.00 |
FIFA 18 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 42.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 19.40 |
Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 6.20 |
F1 2017 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.00 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 10.00 |
Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.10 |
Team Fortress 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 35.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 32. 80 |
Dirt 4 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 32.80 |
Rocket League (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 44.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 22.75 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 16.30 |
Prey (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 21.50 |
Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.20 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.20 |
For Honor (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.30 |
Resident Evil 7 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.20 |
Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 53. 40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 36.10 |
Civilization VI (2016)
| Low, 1024×768 | 29.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12.10 |
Overwatch (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.60 |
Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
| Low, 1280×768 | 7.00 |
Hitman 2016 (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 2.00 |
The Division (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 11.30 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
| Low, 1024×768 | 17.03 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.70 |
Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 26. 90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.60 |
World of Warships (2015)
| Low, 1366×768 | 37.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.80 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
| Low, 1280×720 | 34.15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.20 |
The Witcher 3 (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.00 |
Dirt Rally (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 59.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 22.00 |
Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 19.30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 14.80 |
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 12.00 |
Alien: Isolation (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 24.15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 15. 60 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19.15 |
| Medium, 1344×756 | 12.40 |
Sims 4 (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 111.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.30 |
Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
| Low, 1280×720 | 17.40 |
| Medium, 1280×720 | 13.90 |
Thief (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 6.80 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.70 |
X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 27.65 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 15.45 |
| High, 1366×768 | 7.75 |
Battlefield 4 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 16.50 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12. 00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 9.20 |
Total War: Rome II (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 27.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 20.30 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.10 |
Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.00 |
Metro: Last Light (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 13.95 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.60 |
| High, 1366×768 | 6.45 |
BioShock Infinite (2013)
| Low, 1280×720 | 40.12 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.13 |
| High, 1366×768 | 19.30 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 7.50 |
StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 75. 30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.30 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.60 |
Tomb Raider (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 46.53 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.40 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.47 |
Diablo III (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 50.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.55 |
| High, 1366×768 | 27.70 |
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.05 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 20.35 |
| High, 1366×768 | 14.15 |
Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
| Low, 1024×768 | 52.65 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25.65 |
StarCraft 2 (2010)
| Low, 1024×768 | 81.40 |
| Medium, 1360×768 | 24. 30 |
| High, 1360×768 | 18.60 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 12.40 |
World of Warcraft (2005)
| Low, 800×600 | 82.60 |
| Medium, 1024×768 | 43.70 |
Specifications (specs)
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge |
| Family | AMD A-Series Processors |
| Launch date | 1 June 2016 |
| OPN Tray | AM9220AYN23AC |
| OS Support | Windows 10 — 64-Bit Edition, RHEL x86 64-Bit, Ubuntu x86 64-Bit |
| Place in performance rating | 1391 |
| Series | AMD A6-Series APU for Laptops |
| Vertical segment | Laptop |
| 64 bit support | |
| Base frequency | 2. 5 GHz |
| Compute Cores | 5 |
| Die size | 124.5 mm |
| L1 cache | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 90°C |
| Maximum frequency | 2.9 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 |
| Number of GPU cores | 3 |
| Number of threads | 2 |
| Transistor count | 1200 Million |
| Unlocked | |
|
|
|
| Max memory channels | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 17. 1 GB/s |
| Supported memory frequency | 2133 MHz |
| Supported memory types | DDR4 |
| Graphics max frequency | 655 MHz |
| iGPU core count | 3 |
| Processor graphics | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |
| DisplayPort | |
| HDMI | |
| Configurable TDP | 10-15 Watt |
| Sockets supported | FP4 BGA |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| PCI Express revision | 3. 0 |
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | |
AMD A6-9225 vs AMD A6-9220
|
|
|
|
|
AMD A6-9225 vs AMD A6-9220
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the AMD A6-9225 on one side and the AMD A6-9220 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the notebook sector, It has 2 cores, 2 threads, a maximum frequency of 3,0GHz. The second is used on the notebook segment, it has a total of 2 cores, 2 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 2,9 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specifications:
| Processor | AMD A6-9225 | AMD A6-9220 | ||||||
| Market (main) | Notebook | Notebook | ||||||
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
| Microarchitecture | Excavator | Excavator | ||||||
| Core name | Stoney Ridge | Stoney Ridge | ||||||
| Family | A6-9000 | A6-9000 | ||||||
| Part number(s), S-Spec | AM9225AYN23AC | AM9220AYN23AC | ||||||
| Release date | Q2 2018 | Q2 2017 | ||||||
| Lithography | 28 nm | 28 nm | ||||||
| Transistors | 1. 200.000.000 |
1.200.000.000 | ||||||
| Cores | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Threads | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Base frequency | 2,6 GHz | 2,5 GHz | ||||||
| Turbo frequency | 3,0 GHz | 2,9 GHz | ||||||
| Cache memory | 1 MB | 1 MB | ||||||
| Max memory capacity | 8 GB | 8 GB | ||||||
| Memory types | DDR4-2133 | DDR4-2133 | ||||||
| Max # of memory channels | 1 | 1 | ||||||
| Max PCIe lanes | 8 | 6 | ||||||
| TDP | 15 W | 15 W | ||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | AMD Radeon R4 Mobile Graphics (Stoney) | AMD Radeon R4 Mobile Graphics (Stoney) | ||||||
| GPU cores | 3 | 3 | ||||||
| GPU shading units | 192 | 192 | ||||||
| GPU base clock | 200 MHz | 200 MHz | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | 686 MHz | 655 MHz | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | 251,5 GFLOPS | 251,5 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Socket | BGA | BGA | ||||||
| Maximum temperature | 90°C | 90°C | ||||||
| CPU-Z single thread | 185 | 166 | ||||||
| CPU-Z multi thread | 307 | 284 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 70 | 68 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 110 | 110 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 single thread | 180 | 168 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 multi-thread | 270 | 280 | ||||||
| PassMark single thread | 1. 175 |
1.120 | ||||||
| PassMark CPU Mark | 1.324 | 1.252 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core |
1.756 | 1.669 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
2.650 | 2.490 | ||||||
| (Windows) Geekbench 5 single core |
319 | 339 | ||||||
| (Windows) Geekbench 5 multi-core |
506 | 548 | ||||||
| (SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
30,44 GFLOPS | 29,22 GFLOPS | ||||||
| (Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
177 pts / W | 166 pts / W | ||||||
| Amazon | ||||||||
| eBay |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the maximum frequency of AMD A6-9225 is greater, that their respective TDP are of the same order. The AMD A6-9225 was designed earlier.
Performances :
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.
| CPU-Z — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9225 |
185 307 |
| AMD A6-9220 |
166 284 |
In single core, the difference is 11%.
In multi-core, the differential gap is 8%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
CPU-Z is a system information software that provides the name of the processor, its model number, the codename, the cache levels, the package, the process. It can also gives data about the mainboard, the memory. It makes real time measurement, with finally a benchmark for the single thread, as well as for the multi thread.
| Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9225 |
70 110 |
| AMD A6-9220 |
68 110 |
In single core, the difference is 3%. In multi-core, the results are identical.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
| Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9220 |
168 280 |
| AMD A6-9225 |
180 270 |
In single core, the difference is 7%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 4%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.
| PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9225 |
1.175 1.324 |
| AMD A6-9220 |
1.120 1.252 |
In single core, the difference is 5%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 6%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
On Windows 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9225 |
1.756 2.650 |
| AMD A6-9220 |
1.669 2.490 |
In single core, the difference is 5%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 6%.
On Linux 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9225 |
2.  0242.943 |
| AMD A6-9220 |
1.791 2.432 |
In single core, the difference is 13%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 21%.
On Android 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Android 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9220 |
2.081 3.127 |
| AMD A6-9225 |
1.415 2.142 |
In single core, the difference is 47%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 46%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing.
This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
On Windows:
| Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9220 |
339 548 |
| AMD A6-9225 |
319 506 |
In single core, the difference is 6%. In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 8%.
On Linux:
| Geekbench 5 — Multi-core & single core score — Linux | |
|---|---|
| AMD A6-9225 |
388 481 |
| AMD A6-9220 |
287 376 |
In single core, the difference is 35%. In multi-core, the differential gap is 28%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 5 is a software for measuring the performance of a computer system, for fixed devices, mobile devices, servers. This platform makes it possible to better compare the power of the CPU, the computing power and to compare it with similar or totally different systems. Geekbench 5 includes new workloads that represent work tasks and applications that we can find in reality.
Equivalence:
AMD A6-9225 Intel equivalentAMD A6-9220 Intel equivalent
See also:
AMD A6-9220CAMD A6-9220e
Processor A6-9220 [in 18 benchmarks]
AMD
A6-9220
- Interface
- Core frequency
- Video memory size
- Memory type
- Memory frequency
- Maximum resolution
Description
AMD started AMD A6-9220 sales 1 June 2016.
This is Stoney Ridge architecture notebook processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 2 cores and 2 threads and is manufactured in 28nm process technology, the maximum frequency is 2900 MHz, multiplier locked.
In terms of compatibility, this is a BGA socket processor with a TDP of 10-15W. It supports DDR4 memory.
It provides poor benchmark performance at
1.28%
from the leader, which is AMD EPYC 7h22.
A6
9220
or
EPYC
7h22
General information
Information about the type (desktop or laptop) and architecture of the A6-9220, as well as when sales started and cost at that time.
| place in performance rating | 2226 | |
| for laptops | ||
| Windows 11 compatible | — |
1 compatible
Information on A6-9220 compatibility with other computer components.
Useful, for example, when choosing the configuration of a future computer or to upgrade an existing one.
Please note that the power consumption of some processors can significantly exceed their nominal TDP even without overclocking. Some may even double their claims if the motherboard allows you to adjust the power settings of the processor.
| Extended instructions | Single-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization, |
Virtualization technologies
The technologies supported by the A6-9220 that accelerate the performance of virtual machines are listed.
| AMD-V | + |
Memory support
Types, maximum size and number of channels of RAM supported by A6-9220. Depending on the motherboard, a higher memory frequency may be supported.
| RAM | DDR4 | out of 5200 (Ryzen 5 7600x) |
Video — characteristics
General parameters of the video card built into the A6-9220.
| GPU | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) |
Benchmark tests
These are the results of the A6-9220 performance tests in non-gaming benchmarks. The overall score is set from 0 to 100, where 100 corresponds to the fastest processor at the moment.
Overall performance in tests
This is our overall performance rating. We regularly improve our algorithms, but if you find any inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in the comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
A6-9220
1.28
- Passmark
- Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
- Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
- 3DMark06 CPU
- Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
- Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
- Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
- Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
- TrueCrypt AES
- WinRAR 4.
0 - x264 encoding pass 2
- x264 encoding pass 1
- Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core
- Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core
- Geekbench 2
- Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core
- Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widely used benchmark consisting of 8 different tests, including integer and floating point calculations, extended instruction tests, compression, encryption and game physics calculations. Also includes a separate single-threaded test.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A6-9220
1288
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is a very outdated ray tracing benchmark for processors developed by the authors of Cinema 4D — Maxon. The Single-Core version uses a single CPU thread to render a futuristic motorcycle model.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
A6-9220
2432
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 that uses all processor threads.
The possible number of threads in this version is limited to 16.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A6-9220
3941
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is an outdated set of benchmarks based on DirectX 9 by Futuremark. Its processor part contains two tests, one of which calculates the pathfinding of game AI, the other emulates game physics using the PhysX package.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A6-9220
2253
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 that uses all processor threads. This version supports a maximum of 64 threads.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
A6-9220
1
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core (sometimes referred to as Multi-Thread) is a variant of Cinebench R15 that uses all of the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
A6-9220
112
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (Release 15) is a benchmark created by Maxon, the creator of the popular Cinema 4D 3D modeling package.
It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench using more modern variants of the Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes referred to as Single-Thread) uses only one CPU thread to render a room full of mirror balls and complexly shaped lights.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
A6-9220
69
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark developed by Maxon. authors of Cinema 4D. It has been superseded by later versions of Cinebench which use more modern variants of the Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads one CPU thread with ray tracing, rendering a glossy room full of crystal spheres and lights.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
A6-9220
0.8
TrueCrypt AES
TrueCrypt is a deprecated program that was widely used to encrypt disk partitions on the fly. It contains several built-in benchmarks, one of which is TrueCrypt AES. It measures the speed of data encryption using the AES algorithm.
The result of the test is the encryption speed in gigabytes per second.
Benchmark coverage: 13%
A6-9220
1
WinRAR 4.0
WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of the popular archiver. It contains an internal speed test using maximum compression by the RAR algorithm on large amounts of randomly generated data. Results are measured in kilobytes per second.
Benchmark coverage: 12%
A6-9220
770
x264 encoding pass 2
x264 Pass 2 is a slower MPEG4 x264 video compression benchmark, resulting in a variable bit rate output file. This results in a better quality of the resulting video file, as a higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. The benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.
Benchmark coverage: 12%
A6-9220
9
x264 encoding pass 1
The x264 benchmark uses the MPEG 4 x264 compression method to encode the sample video in HD (720p).
Pass 1 is a faster option that produces an output file at a constant bit rate. Its result is measured in frames per second, that is, how many frames of the source video file were encoded in one second on average.
Benchmark coverage: 12%
A6-9220
47
Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core
Benchmark coverage: 6%
A6-9220
2921
Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core
Benchmark coverage: 6%
A6-9220
1798
Geekbench 2
Benchmark coverage: 5%
A6-9220
3461
Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core
Benchmark coverage: 3%
A6-9220
2805
Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core
Benchmark coverage: 3%
A6-9220
1885
Relative capacity
Overall performance of the A6-9220 compared to its closest competitor in notebook processors.
AMD A8-4555M
101.56
Intel Pentium A1020
100
AMD A4-5000
100
AMD A6-9220
100
Intel Core i5-460M
99.22
AMD A6-3420M
99.22
Intel Celeron 2950M
99.22
Competitor from Intel
We believe that the nearest equivalent to A6-9220 from Intel is Pentium A1020, which is approximately equal in speed and higher by 1 position in our rating.
Pentium
A1020
Compare
Here are some of Intel’s closest competitors to the A6-9220:
Intel Pentium 3550M
101.56
Intel Core i5-480M
101.56
Intel Pentium A1020
100
AMD A6-9220
100
Intel Core i7-660UM
99.
22
Intel Pentium Dual Core T4400
99.22
Intel Celeron 2950M
99.22
Other processors
Here we recommend several processors that are more or less similar in performance to the reviewed one.
Pentium
A1020
Compare
Celeron
2950M
Compare
Pentium
3550M
Compare
Celeron
3865U
Compare
A6
9210
Compare
Pentium
N3700
Compare
Recommended video cards
According to our statistics, these video cards are most often used with A6-9220:
Radeon R4
Graphics
50.
7%
Radeon
520
9.4%
Radeon R5
M330
8.5%
Radeon
530
7.3%
Radeon R4
(Stoney Ridge)
3.3%
Radeon R5
Graphics
2.3%
Radeon R4
Mobile Graphics
2.1%
Radeon
Graphics
1.4%
Radeon R4
(Beema)
1.3%
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
0.9%
User rating
Here you can see the evaluation of the processor by users, as well as put your own rating.
Tips and comments
Here you can ask a question about the A6-9220 processor, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
AMD A6-9220 processor review: specifications, benchmark tests
The A6-9220 processor was released by AMD, release date: 1 June 2016. The processor is designed for laptop computers and is built on the Stoney Ridge architecture.
Processor unlocked for overclocking. The total number of cores — 2, threads — 2. The maximum clock frequency of the processor — 2.9 GHz. The maximum temperature is 90°C. Technological process — 28 nm. Cache size: L1 — 160 KB, L2 — 1 MB.
Supported memory type: DDR4.
Supported socket type: FP4 BGA. Power consumption (TDP): 15 Watts.
AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is integrated into the processor with the following graphics settings: maximum frequency — 655 MHz, number of cores — 3.
Benchmarks
| PassMark Single thread mark |
|
|||||
| PassMark CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Face Detection |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Ocean Surface Simulation |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Video Composition |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Bitcoin Mining |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4. 0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4. 0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex |
|
|
680 mPixels/s 
075 Frames/s 
000 Fps | Name | Meaning |
|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1142 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1288 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection | 5.922 mPixels/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation | 4.825 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex | 0.075 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition | 10. 467 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining | 29.364 mHash/s |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen | 743 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1537 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 4038 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen | 743.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1537.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 4038.000 Fps |
| Boost Core Clock | 800MHz |
| Core frequency | 200MHz |
| Floating point performance | 388. 1 gflops |
| Process | 28nm |
| Number of shaders | 256 |
| Texturing speed | 12.13 GTexel/s |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| Number of transistors | 2,410 million |
Gaming performance
1. Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
2. Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
3Metro Exodus (2019)
4 Far Cry New Dawn (2019)
5 Apex Legends (2019)
6.
Just Cause 4 (2018)
7. Darksiders III (2018)
8. Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
9. Hitman 2 (2018)
10 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
11. Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
12. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
13. F1 2018 (2018)
14. Monster Hunter World (2018)
15. Far Cry 5 (2018)
16. X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
17 Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
18. Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
19. Fortnite (2018)
20. Destiny 2 (2017)
21. ELEX (2017)
22.
The Evil Within 2 (2017)
23. Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
24. FIFA 18 (2017)
25. Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
26. F1 2017 (2017)
27. Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
28. Team Fortress 2 (2017)
29. Dirt 4 (2017)
30 Rocket League (2017)
31. Prey (2017)
32 Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
33. Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
34. For Honor (2017)
35 Resident Evil 7 (2017)
36. Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
37. Civilization VI (2016)
38 Overwatch (2016)
39 Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
40.
Hitman 2016 (2016)
41. The Division (2016)
42 Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
43 Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
44. World of Warships (2015)
45. Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
46. The Witcher 3 (2015)
47 Dirt Rally (2015)
48 Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
49. Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
50 Alien: Isolation (2014)
51. Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
52 Sims 4 (2014)
53 Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
54. Thief (2014)
55.
X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
56. Battlefield 4 (2013)
57 Total War: Rome II (2013)
58 Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
59. Metro: Last Light (2013)
60 BioShock Infinite (2013)
61. StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
62. Tomb Raider (2013)
63. Diablo III (2012)
64. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
65 Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
66. Starcraft 2 (2010)
67. World of Warcraft (2005)
Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 39.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28. 50 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25.00 |
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 30.90 | Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.900 |
Metro Exodus (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Far Cry New Dawn (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 60059 Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Just Cause 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.30 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Darksiders III (2018)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 22.50 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 11.80 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
39. 00 |
|
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 14.00 |
Hitman 2 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3.50 |
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 10.00 | Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.00 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
F1 2018 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 12.00 |
Monster Hunter World (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4. 00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
Far Cry 5 (2018)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
X-PLANE 11.11 (2018)
| LOW, 12200060 | 13.70 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.40 |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3.00 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.10 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Fortnite (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Destiny 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10. 00 |
ELEX (2017)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
The Evil Within 2 (2017)
| LOW, 1280×720 9009 900 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.00 |
FIFA 18 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 42.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 19.40 |
Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 6.20 |
F1 2017 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.00 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 10.00 |
Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG ) (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12. 10 |
Team Fortress 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 35.20 | ||
| Medium, 1366×768 | 32.80 |
Dirt 4 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 32.80 |
Rocket League (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 44.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 22.75 |
| HIGH, 1920×1080 | 16.30 |
Prey
| Low, 1280×720 | 21.50 |
Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.20 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.20 |
for Honor (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19. 900 | Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.30 |
Resident Evil 7 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.20 |
Farming Simulator 17 (2016 )
| Low, 1280×720 | 53.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 36.10 |
Civilization VI
| Low, 1024×768 | 29.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12.10 |
Overwatch (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.60 |
ASHES of the SINGULARITY (2016)
| Low, 1280×768 | 7. 00 |
Hitman 2016 (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 2.00 |
The Division (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 11.30 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
| Low, 1024×768 | 17.03 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.70 |
| Low, 1024×768 | 26.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.60 |
World of Warships (2015)
| Low, 1366×768 | 37.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.80 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
| Low, 1280×720 | 34. 15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.20 |
The Witcher 3 (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.00 |
Dirt Rally (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 59.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 22.00 |
Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
| LOW, 1024×768 | 19.30 |
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 12.00 |
Alien: Isolation (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 24. 15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 15.60 |
Middle-Earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 19009 |
| 12.40 |
Sims 4 (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 111.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.30 |
Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 17.40 |
| Medium, 1280×720 | 13.90 |
Thief,
| LET0060 | 9.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 6.80 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.70 |
X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 27.65 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 15.45 |
| High, 1366×768 | 7. 75 |
Battlefield 4 (2013)
| Low, 10249 Low, 10249 Low, 10248 | Low0060 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12.00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 9.20 |
Total War: Rome II (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 27.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 20.30 |
| HIGH, 1366×768 | 17.10 |
Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
| LOW, 1024×768 9.0 13.0060 | |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.00 |
Metro: Last Light (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 13.95 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.60 |
| HIGH, 1366×768 | 6.45 |
BIOSHOCK Infinite (2013)
LOW, 1280×720 900. 22 | |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.13 |
| High, 1366×768 | 19.30 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 7.50 |
StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
| Low 1024×768 | 75.30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.30 |
| HIGH, 1366×768 | 17.60 |
TOMB (2013)0056
Diablo III (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 50.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.55 |
| HIGH, 1366×768 | 27.70 |
The Elder Scrolls (2011)0056
35 Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
| Low, 1024×768 | 52.65 |
| HIGH, 1366×768 | 25.65 |
Starcraft 2 (2010)
| LOW, 1024×768 | |
| Medium, 1360×768 | 24.30 |
| High, 1360×768 | 18.60 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 12.40 |
World of Warcraft (2005)
| Low, 800×600 | 82.60 |
| Medium, 1024×768 | 43.70 |
Features
| 0 Architecture name | Stoney Ridge |
| Family | AMD A-Series Processors |
| Production date | June 1, 2016 |
| OPN Tray | AM9220AYN23AC |
| OS Support | Windows 10 — 64-Bit Edition, RHEL x86 64-Bit, Ubuntu x86 64-Bit |
| Place in the ranking | 1391 |
| Series | AMD A6-Series APU for Laptops |
| Applicability | Laptop |
| Support 64 bit | |
| Base frequency | 2. 5GHz |
| Compute Cores | 5 |
| Crystal area | 124.5mm |
| Level 1 cache | 160KB |
| Level 2 cache | 1MB |
| Process | 28nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 90°C |
| Maximum frequency | 2.9 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 |
| Number of GPU cores | 3 |
| Number of threads | 2 |
| Number of transistors | 1200 Million |
| Unlocked | |
| Maximum number of memory channels | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 17. 1 GB/s |
| Supported memory frequency | 2133MHz |
| Supported memory types | DDR4 |
| Maximum GPU clock | 655 MHz |
| Number of iGPU cores | 3 |
| Integrated graphics | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |
| DisplayPort | |
| HDMI | |
| Configurable TDP | 10-15 Watt |
| Supported sockets | FP4 BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| PCI Express revision | 3. 0 |
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | |
characteristics AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR), price, Test, competitors
- Home M.SR)
Processor A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) Marked by the manufacturer as: AM9220AYN23AC.
Number of cores — 2.
A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) core frequency — 2.5 GHz. The maximum frequency in AMD Turbo Core mode reaches 2.9 GHz.
Price in Russia
Want to buy A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) cheap? Look at the list of stores that already sell the processor in your city.
Family
- A6-9200 APU (2016 M.SR)
- A6-9210 APU (2016 M.SR)
Test AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR)
0020 Speed in games
Performance in games and similar applications, according to our tests.
The performance of 4 cores, if any, and performance per core has the greatest impact on the result, since most games do not fully use more than 4 cores.
The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important.
Speed in office use
Performance in everyday work such as browsers and office applications.
The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.
Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance.
Speed in heavy applications
Performance in resource-intensive tasks loading a maximum of 8 cores.
The performance of all cores and their number has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.
At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor.
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values corresponding to the processor.
Speed of numerical operations
Simple household tasks |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Minimum | Average | Maximum | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 22 | Memory: 53 |
|
Memory 56.1 |
||
| 21 | 1 core: 46 | 60 |
|
1 core 22.4 |
||
| 34 | 2 cores: 76 | 106 |
|
2 cores 18. |
||
8
Demanding games and tasks |
||
| Minimum | Average | Maximum |
| 43 | 4 Cores: 79 | 106 906 |
|
4 cores 9.9 |
||
| 45 | 8 cores: 82 | 106 |
|
8 cores 5.3 |
Extreme |
||
| Minimum | Average | Maximum |
| 40 | All cores: 80 | 106 |
|
All cores 1. |
5 Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.
We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS.
Ideally, the budget shopper should aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.
When choosing a processor to work with, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads.
Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.
Tests in games
FPS measured by us in popular games on AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) and system requirements. Please note that the official requirements of developers in games do not always match the data of real tests. Also, the result is strongly influenced by the overclocking of the system and the graphic settings in the game. We test at high settings in FullHD resolution to get numbers close to real gameplay.
On average for all gaming tests, the processor scored 28.
4 points out of 100, where 100 is the fastest gaming processor to date.
- n.a.
We have put together a list of parts that users most often choose when building a computer based on the A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR). Also with these components, the best results in tests and stable operation are achieved.
The most popular config: motherboard for AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) — HP Laptop 15-bw0xx, video card — GeForce 7100 GS.
Characteristics
The data is not yet filled in, so the tables may lack information or existing functions may be omitted.
Basic
| Manufacturer | AMD |
| Date of release The month and year the processor was released. | 10-2019 |
| Cores The number of physical cores. | 2 |
ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees. |
2 |
| Multithreading TechnologyWith Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized as two logical cores in the operating system, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications. | Missing |
| Base frequencyGuaranteed frequency of all processor cores at maximum load. Performance in single-threaded and multi-threaded applications and games depends on it. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one. | 2.5GHz |
Turbo frequencyThe maximum frequency of one processor core in turbo mode. Manufacturers allow modern processors to independently increase the frequency of one or more cores under heavy load, due to which performance is noticeably increased. It may depend on the nature of the load, the number of loaded cores, temperature and the specified limits. Significantly affects the speed in games and applications that are demanding on the frequency of the CPU. |
2.9 GHz |
| Embedded Options Available Two housing versions. Standard and designed for mobile devices. In the second version, the processor can be soldered on the motherboard. | No |
Video core
RAM
PCI
Data protection
Design
Competitors
Please note that competitors are selected automatically based on performance in a particular task. Therefore, some may puzzle you. We are improving our selection algorithm, treat with understanding.
Compare
AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) vs Intel Pentium Dual E2160
AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.SR) vs Intel Celeron Dual Core T3300
AMD A6-9220 APU (2016 M.