Microsoft SQ1 vs Celeron N4000
Aggregate performance score
Microsoft SQ1 outperforms Celeron N4000 by a whopping 296% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2506 | 1481 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | Qualcomm Snapdragon |
| Power efficiency | 14.59 | 0.12 |
| Architecture codename | Goldmont Plus (2017) | Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019) |
| Release date | 11 December 2017 (6 years ago) | 2 October 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Celeron N4000 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 | 2 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 1.1 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Multiplier | 11 | no data |
| L1 cache | 112 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 deg C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron N4000 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | no data |
| Socket | FCBGA1090 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 3000 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | - | 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 |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel UHD Graphics 600 | Qualcomm Adreno 685 |
| Max video memory | 8 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 650 MHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 12 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| MIPI-DSI | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N4000 and Microsoft SQ1.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | no data |
| USB revision | 2.0/3.0 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | no data |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | 2 | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | no 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.96 | 3.80 |
| Recency | 11 December 2017 | 2 October 2019 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 3000 Watt |
Celeron N4000 has 49900% lower power consumption.
Microsoft SQ1, on the other hand, has a 295.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Microsoft SQ1 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N4000 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N4000 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.
