Atom 330 vs A9-9425
Atom 330
A9-9425
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Atom 330 is positioned at rank 39 and the A9-9425 is on rank 1078, so the Atom 330 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Atom 330
Performance Per Dollar A9-9425
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Atom 330 | A9-9425 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Diamondville (2008−2009) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) / 28 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Atom 330 | A9-9425 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Atom 330 and A9-9425
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.
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.
Processing Power
The Atom 330 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the A9-9425's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 0.1 GHz on the Atom 330 versus 3.7 GHz on the A9-9425 — a 189.5% clock advantage for the A9-9425 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Atom 330 uses the Diamondville (2008−2009) architecture (45 nm), while the A9-9425 uses Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Atom 330 scores 1,530 against the A9-9425's 1,518 — a 0.8% lead for the Atom 330. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Atom 330 | A9-9425 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 0.1 GHz | 3.7 GHz+3600% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | 3.1 GHz+94% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 28 nm-38% |
| Architecture | Diamondville (2008−2009) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| PassMark | 1,530 | 1,518 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 422 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 724 |
Memory & Platform
The Atom 330 uses the PBGA437 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the A9-9425 uses FT4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-533 on the Atom 330 versus DDR4-2133 on the A9-9425 — the A9-9425 supports 66.7% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A9-9425 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Atom 330) vs 8 (A9-9425) — the A9-9425 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel BGA437 (Atom 330) and SoC (A9-9425).
| Feature | Atom 330 | A9-9425 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PBGA437 | FT4 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-533 | DDR4-2133+100% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 8 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Atom 330) / AMD-V (A9-9425). The A9-9425 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)), while the Atom 330 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A9-9425 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A9-9425 rivals Pentium N4200.
| Feature | Atom 330 | A9-9425 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Budget Laptop |
Value Analysis
The Atom 330 launched at $43 MSRP, while the A9-9425 debuted at $150. At current prices ($30 vs $30), the A9-9425 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Atom 330 delivers 51.0 pts/$ vs 50.6 pts/$ for the A9-9425 — making the Atom 330 the 0.8% better value option.
| Feature | Atom 330 | A9-9425 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $43-71% | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 51.0 | 50.6 |
| Release Date | 2008 | 2016 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Atom 330 and A9-9425
