A9-9425 vs Celeron 1017U

A9-9425 vs Celeron 1017U Performance Spectrum

A9-9425

2 / 2

1,518

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 1017U

2 / 2

1,508

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.

A9-9425 vs Celeron 1017U 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.

A9-9425 vs Celeron 1017U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A9-9425

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 512W, a 497W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $150 MSRP, while Celeron 1017U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Celeron 1017U

2013

Why buy it

✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,508 vs 1,518).
❌3313.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is A9-9425 better than Celeron 1017U?

Yes. A9-9425 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.7% 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, A9-9425 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.6% 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, A9-9425 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A9-9425 is the better buy right now. A9-9425 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $150 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (10.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A9-9425 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A9-9425 vs Celeron 1017U Technical Specifications

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

A9-9425

The A9-9425 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 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT4. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,518 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron 1017U

The Celeron 1017U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,508 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A9-9425 and Celeron 1017U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the A9-9425 versus 1.6 GHz on the Celeron 1017U — a 79.2% clock advantage for the A9-9425 (base: 3.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A9-9425 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron 1017U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A9-9425 scores 1,518 against the Celeron 1017U's 1,508 — a 0.7% lead for the A9-9425. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A9-9425 vs 2 MB on the Celeron 1017U.

Feature	A9-9425	Celeron 1017U
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+131%	1.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.1 GHz+94%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB
Process	28 nm	22 nm-21%
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,518	1,508
Geekbench 6 Single	422	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	724	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A9-9425 uses the FT4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 1017U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A9-9425 versus DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1017U — the A9-9425 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 1017U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A9-9425) vs 2 (Celeron 1017U). PCIe lanes: 8 (A9-9425) vs 16 (Celeron 1017U) — the Celeron 1017U offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SoC (A9-9425) and Intel FCBGA1023 (Celeron 1017U).

Feature	A9-9425	Celeron 1017U
Socket	FT4	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+33%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A9-9425) / not specified (Celeron 1017U). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) (A9-9425) and Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1017U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A9-9425 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A9-9425 rivals Pentium N4200.

Feature	A9-9425	Celeron 1017U
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)	Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	AMD-V	—
Target Use	Budget Laptop	—