Microsoft SQ1 vs Core 2 Duo T5870
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo T5870 and Microsoft SQ1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 1438 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core 2 Duo | Qualcomm Snapdragon |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019) |
| Release date | 1 October 2008 (15 years ago) | 2 October 2019 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo T5870 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus support | 800 MHz | no data |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo T5870 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) | 34 Watt | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Qualcomm Adreno 685 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Microsoft SQ1 outperforms Core 2 Duo T5870 by 717% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Core 2 Duo T5870 outperforms Microsoft SQ1 by 289% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Microsoft SQ1 outperforms Core 2 Duo T5870 by 12% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
Core 2 Duo T5870 outperforms Microsoft SQ1 by 323% in wPrime 32.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 October 2008 | 2 October 2019 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
Microsoft SQ1 has an age advantage of 11 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Core 2 Duo T5870 and Microsoft SQ1. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo T5870 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.
