Is the AMD A9-9410 better than the i5-6200U when it comes to multitasking?

[Happy Crayfish]

I've been looking for a budget laptop to use for programming, and I've found a few that I think are pretty decent, however I'm unsure about the AMD CPU's since I have only had Intel ones myself.

I was looking at a laptop which has the i5-6200U, and then saw another laptop for a little higher price, with much better ram, a SSD but with the AMD A9-9410 CPU.

Since processing power is what I need the most, I'm wondering if the AMD A9-9410 is worse, better or equal to the i5-6200U when it comes to multitasking/multithreading.

If the AMD A9-9410 is better, I would like to know if it's better than the i5-7200U as well.

 

[jaslion]

I've been looking for a budget laptop to use for programming, and I've found a few that I think are pretty decent, however I'm unsure about the AMD CPU's since I have only had Intel ones myself.

I was looking at a laptop which has the i5-6200U, and then saw another laptop for a little higher price, with much better ram, a SSD but with the AMD A9-9410 CPU.

Since processing power is what I need the most, I'm wondering if the AMD A9-9410 is worse, better or equal to the i5-6200U when it comes to multitasking/multithreading.

If the AMD A9-9410 is better, I would like to know if it's better than the i5-7200U as well.

Cpu performance they are on par. Gpu wise the a9 is superior.

 

[bboiprfsr]

The intel i5 has 2 cores 4 threads, while the AMD apu A9 has 2 cores 2 threads.
Processors................... A9 i5
Single Thread Rating......1567 1495
CPU Mark..................... 2598 3959

The amd A9 has slightly better single threading performance and obviously better integrated graphics; however, it uses more power consumption at 25W. The Intel i5 has more threads but is more power efficient, so therefore has better battery life. Regardless, having both an SSD and better RAM are good features in regards to selling points. Also AMD generally seems to offer more value than Intel, who, on the contrary, demands a premium.

Bottom line: seems like the 6200U has better multithreading due to its threads. However, AMD has a better overalll package in my personal opinion with faster storage/memory to boot applications faster along with better graphics. What are the price differences by the way?

 

[Happy Crayfish]

The intel i5 has 2 cores 4 threads, while the AMD apu A9 has 2 cores 2 threads.
Processors................... A9 i5
Single Thread Rating......1567 1495
CPU Mark..................... 2598 3959

The amd A9 has slightly better single threading performance and obviously better integrated graphics; however, it uses more power consumption at 25W. The Intel i5 has more threads but is more power efficient, so therefore has better battery life. Regardless, having both an SSD and better RAM are good features in regards to selling points. Also AMD generally seems to offer more value than Intel, who, on the contrary, demands a premium.

Bottom line: seems like the 6200U has better multithreading due to its threads. However, AMD has a better overalll package in my personal opinion with faster storage/memory to boot applications faster along with better graphics. What are the price differences by the way?

HP Notebook 15-ay011nr (Intel core i5-7200U) costs 460 USD, and the Acer Aspire 15 E5-523-91NK (AMD one) costs 542 USD.

And actually both of them have SSD's, the Acer one with AMD however has more storage capacity on the SSD, but I don't think that matters since I won't be installing any games at all.

As far as I know having 4 threads instead of 2 is much more important than having 2 threads but a slightly better individual core performance, at least in my case. (Not sure though)
(I'll be doing lots of work in Visual Studio, Lots of chrome/firefox tabs open, which is most likely it all, and as far as I know those applications should run better if you have more threads?)

 

[bboiprfsr]

Yeah, 4 threads are better for multitasking and productivity. Is your budget $500 +/- $50? I'm kinda accustomed to HP, Acer, Sony, Asus and Dell. Have you looked at either Asus or Dell? They seem a bit more durable and great feature-wise.

If, however, these are the top 2 picks you're having a dilemma on, then the HP one isn't a bad choice. Remember, any processor that has a -U is considered "ultra low power", thus giving it longer battery life but lower performance. I'd suggest shopping around some more if you're really interested in a productivity laptop that's budget-oriented. Perhaps buy used i7's or a10's. Have you checked out your local craigslist. Are you cool with buying used laptops? You'd save a few hundred if you buy laptops one to three years older. just a tip

 

[kgt1182]

For programming, do not go with either.
The A9 9410 has better single thead performance than the i5 7200U by virtue of a significantly higher clock rate, but given that the 7200U is a Ultra Low Voltage CPU, you would be better off getting a i5 7300HQ which has 4 real cores and 4 threads.

 

[Happy Crayfish]

For programming, do not go with either.
The A9 9410 has better single thead performance than the i5 7200U by virtue of a significantly higher clock rate, but given that the 7200U is a Ultra Low Voltage CPU, you would be better off getting a i5 7300HQ which has 4 real cores and 4 threads.

Yeah but I can't find any with HQ at my budget.

 

[brianyvesmin]

Some would have you believe that Dell or HP are more durable.
What a load of bull!!!
You want durable... how long are you going to keep the laptop 20 years?
Higher spec determines durability more than actual physical durability... otherwise the most durable laptops would be Lenovo ThinkPad T series and Panasonic Toughbooks and the like.

Don't get conned by American "salesmanship".

As for the laptops, there's only one way to find out... and the difference if any will not even matter in a couple of years... don't you now find all the debates about this GeForce and that Radon of 5 years ago, a waste of time?