A4-9120 vs Core 2 Duo E6420

A4-9120 vs Core 2 Duo E6420 Performance Spectrum

A4-9120

2 / 2

1,222

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Duo E6420

2 / 2

1,235

+1.1%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A4-9120 vs Core 2 Duo E6420 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A4-9120 vs Core 2 Duo E6420: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A4-9120

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R3, while Core 2 Duo E6420 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,222 vs 1,235).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core 2 Duo E6420.

Core 2 Duo E6420

2007

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike A4-9120.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $183 MSRP, while A4-9120 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-9120 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-9120 better than Core 2 Duo E6420?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-9120 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 48 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo E6420 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo E6420 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A4-9120 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A4-9120 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $183 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 48 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core 2 Duo E6420 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2007 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (6.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A4-9120 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2007). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-9120 vs Core 2 Duo E6420 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A4-9120

The A4-9120 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: BGA. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,222 points. Launch price was $50.

Core 2 Duo E6420

The Core 2 Duo E6420 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Conroe (2006−2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 2.13 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,235 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-9120 and Core 2 Duo E6420 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-9120 versus 2.13 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E6420 — a 16% clock advantage for the A4-9120 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The A4-9120 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E6420 uses Conroe (2006−2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A4-9120 scores 1,222 against the Core 2 Duo E6420's 1,235 — a 1.1% lead for the Core 2 Duo E6420.

Feature	A4-9120	Core 2 Duo E6420
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+17%	2.13 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+3%	2.13 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%
Process	28 nm-57%	65 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Conroe (2006−2007)
PassMark	1,222	1,235+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	350	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-9120 uses the BGA socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo E6420 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A4-9120 versus 1066 on the Core 2 Duo E6420 — the A4-9120 supports 100.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core 2 Duo E6420 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-9120) vs 2 (Core 2 Duo E6420). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-9120) vs 16 (Core 2 Duo E6420) — the Core 2 Duo E6420 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-9120	Core 2 Duo E6420
Socket	BGA	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+100%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-9120) vs true (Core 2 Duo E6420). The A4-9120 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3), while the Core 2 Duo E6420 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-9120 targets Entry Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-9120 rivals Celeron N3350; Core 2 Duo E6420 rivals Athlon 64 X2 5400+.