A9-9420 vs Atom 330

CPU

GPU

A9-9420

2 Cores2 Thrd15 WWMax: 3.6 GHz2016

Buy on Amazon

Atom 330

2 Cores4 Thrd8 WWMax: 0.1 GHz2008

Buy on Amazon

A9-9420 vs Atom 330 Performance Spectrum

A9-9420

2 / 2

1,538

+0.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom 330

2 / 4

1,530

0.0%

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.

A9-9420 vs Atom 330 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.

A9-9420 vs Atom 330: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A9-9420

2016

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R5, while Atom 330 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.3 vs 35.6 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $43 MSRP).
❌87.5% higher power demand at 15W vs 8W.

Atom 330

2008

Why buy it

✅Costs $107 less on MSRP ($43 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Delivers 247.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 35.6 vs 10.3 PassMark/$ ($43 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Draws 8W instead of 15W, a 7W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,530 vs 1,538).
❌No integrated graphics, while A9-9420 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A9-9420 better than Atom 330?

Yes. A9-9420 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.5% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A9-9420 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.6% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A9-9420 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A9-9420 is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. A9-9420 comes in 248.8% more expensive on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $43 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Atom 330 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 1.6% in the shared gaming data.

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

A9-9420 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A9-9420 vs Atom 330 Technical Specifications

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

A9-9420

The A9-9420 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 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT4. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,538 points. Launch price was $69.

Atom 330

The Atom 330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 April 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Diamondville (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PBGA437. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,530 points. Launch price was $43.

⚡

Processing Power

The A9-9420 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Atom 330's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.6 GHz on the A9-9420 versus 0.1 GHz on the Atom 330 — a 189.2% clock advantage for the A9-9420 (base: 3 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A9-9420 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Atom 330 uses Diamondville (2008−2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A9-9420 scores 1,538 against the Atom 330's 1,530 — a 0.5% lead for the A9-9420. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A9-9420	Atom 330
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.6 GHz+3500%	0.1 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+87%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	1 MB
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Diamondville (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,538	1,530
Geekbench 6 Single	497	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	950	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A9-9420 uses the FT4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Atom 330 uses PBGA437 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A9-9420 versus DDR2-533 on the Atom 330 — the A9-9420 supports 300.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A9-9420 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A9-9420) vs 0 (Atom 330) — the A9-9420 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (A9-9420) and Intel BGA437 (Atom 330).

Feature	A9-9420	Atom 330
Socket	FT4	PBGA437
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+300%	DDR2-533
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB+100%	4 GB
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A9-9420) / not specified (Atom 330). The A9-9420 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R5), while the Atom 330 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A9-9420 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A9-9420 rivals Pentium N4200.

Feature	A9-9420	Atom 330
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Radeon R5	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	AMD-V	—
Target Use	Budget Laptop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A9-9420 was priced at $150, while the Atom 330 came in at $43. On launch pricing ($150 vs $43), Atom 330 was $107 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A9-9420 delivers 10.3 pts/$ vs 35.6 pts/$ for the Atom 330 — making the Atom 330 the 110.5% better value option.

Feature	A9-9420	Atom 330
MSRP	$150	$43-71%
Performance per Dollar	10.3	35.6+246%
Release Date	2016	2008

Search A9-9420 on Amazon

Search Atom 330 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.