A9-9410 vs Athlon II X3 420e

CPU

GPU

A9-9410

2 Cores2 Thrd15 WWMax: 3.5 GHz2016

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon II X3 420e

3 Cores3 Thrd45 WWMax: 2.6 GHz2010

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A9-9410 vs Athlon II X3 420e Performance Spectrum

A9-9410

2 / 2

1,550

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon II X3 420e

3 / 3

1,557

+0.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

A9-9410 vs Athlon II X3 420e 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.

A9-9410 vs Athlon II X3 420e: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A9-9410

2016

Why buy it

✅+11.5% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 15W instead of 45W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R5, while Athlon II X3 420e needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (650 vs 880).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.3 vs 14.6 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X3 420e.

Athlon II X3 420e

2010

Why buy it

✅+35.4% higher Geekbench multi-core.
✅Costs $43 less on MSRP ($107 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Delivers 40.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 14.6 vs 10.3 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike A9-9410.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (314 vs 350).
❌200% higher power demand at 45W vs 15W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A9-9410 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A9-9410 better than Athlon II X3 420e?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A9-9410 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X3 420e pulls ahead with 35.4% better Geekbench multi-core.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X3 420e is the stronger fit. You are getting 35.4% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 3 cores and 3 threads.

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

A9-9410 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A9-9410 comes in 40.2% more expensive on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $107 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X3 420e only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 40.8% better value on paper (14.6 vs 10.3 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

A9-9410 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A9-9410 vs Athlon II X3 420e Technical Specifications

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

A9-9410

The A9-9410 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 31 May 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 1,550 points. Launch price was $69.

Athlon II X3 420e

The Athlon II X3 420e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Rana (2009−2011) architecture. It features 3 cores and 3 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,557 points. Launch price was $116.

⚡

Processing Power

The A9-9410 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon II X3 420e offers 3 cores / 3 threads — the Athlon II X3 420e has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the A9-9410 versus 2.6 GHz on the Athlon II X3 420e — a 29.5% clock advantage for the A9-9410 (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The A9-9410 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Athlon II X3 420e uses Rana (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A9-9410 scores 1,550 against the Athlon II X3 420e's 1,557 — a 0.5% lead for the Athlon II X3 420e. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 350 vs 314, a 10.8% lead for the A9-9410 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 650 vs 880 (30.1% advantage for the Athlon II X3 420e). Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A9-9410	Athlon II X3 420e
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	3 / 3+50%
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz+35%	2.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+12%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	2048 kB+300%	512 kB (per core)
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Rana (2009−2011)
PassMark	1,550	1,557
Geekbench 6 Single	350+11%	314
Geekbench 6 Multi	650	880+35%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A9-9410 uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X3 420e uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A9-9410 versus DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X3 420e — the A9-9410 supports 60% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X3 420e supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A9-9410) vs 2 (Athlon II X3 420e). PCIe lanes: 8 (A9-9410) vs 16 (Athlon II X3 420e) — the Athlon II X3 420e offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (A9-9410) and 760G,785G,880G (Athlon II X3 420e).

Feature	A9-9410	Athlon II X3 420e
Socket	FP4	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+60%	DDR3-1333
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. Both support AMD-V virtualization. The A9-9410 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R5), while the Athlon II X3 420e requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A9-9410 targets Budget Laptop, Athlon II X3 420e targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: A9-9410 rivals Pentium N4200; Athlon II X3 420e rivals Athlon II X3 415e.

Feature	A9-9410	Athlon II X3 420e
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Radeon R5	—
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	AMD-V
Target Use	Budget Laptop	Legacy Desktop

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A9-9410 was priced at $150, while the Athlon II X3 420e came in at $107. On launch pricing ($150 vs $107), Athlon II X3 420e was $43 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A9-9410 delivers 10.3 pts/$ vs 14.6 pts/$ for the Athlon II X3 420e — making the Athlon II X3 420e the 33.9% better value option.

Feature	A9-9410	Athlon II X3 420e
MSRP	$150	$107-29%
Performance per Dollar	10.3	14.6+42%
Release Date	2016	2010

Search A9-9410 on Amazon

Search Athlon II X3 420e on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.