Microsoft SQ1 vs Atom N2650
Primary details
Comparing Atom N2650 and Microsoft SQ1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1487 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Atom | Qualcomm Snapdragon |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.12 |
| Architecture codename | Cedarview-M (2011−2012) | Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019) |
| Release date | 5 January 2012 (12 years ago) | 2 October 2019 (5 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Atom N2650 and Microsoft SQ1 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.73 GHz | 3 GHz |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Atom N2650 and Microsoft SQ1 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Power consumption (TDP) | 3,6 Watt | 3000 Watt |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 (400 MHz) | Qualcomm Adreno 685 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 5 January 2012 | 2 October 2019 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 3 Watt | 3000 Watt |
Atom N2650 has 99900% lower power consumption.
Microsoft SQ1, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Atom N2650 and Microsoft SQ1. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom N2650 and Microsoft SQ1, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
