Microsoft SQ1 vs Celeron N3450

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3450
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.25
Microsoft SQ1
2019
8 cores / 8 threads, 3000 Watt
3.67
+194%

Microsoft SQ1 outperforms Celeron N3450 by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22971486
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronQualcomm Snapdragon
Power efficiency19.720.12
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2014−2016)Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019)
Release date30 August 2016 (8 years ago)2 October 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3450 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speed1.1 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz3 GHz
Multiplier11no data
L2 cache2 MBno data
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3450 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.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketFCBGA1296no data
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt3000 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1 are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
VT-i-no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4no data
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500Qualcomm Adreno 685
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency700 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes6no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron N3450 1.25
Microsoft SQ1 3.67
+194%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron N3450 1987
Microsoft SQ1 5822
+193%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron N3450 1415
+164%
Microsoft SQ1 537

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron N3450 3959
Microsoft SQ1 4276
+8%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron N3450 22.31
Microsoft SQ1 14.2
+57.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.25 3.67
Recency 30 August 2016 2 October 2019
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 3000 Watt

Celeron N3450 has 49900% lower power consumption.

Microsoft SQ1, on the other hand, has a 193.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Microsoft SQ1 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3450 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3450 and Microsoft SQ1, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron N3450
Celeron N3450
Microsoft SQ1
SQ1

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 152 votes

Rate Celeron N3450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 58 votes

Rate Microsoft SQ1 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3450 or Microsoft SQ1, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.