Microsoft SQ1 vs m7-6Y75

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

Core m7-6Y75
2015
2 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
1.47
Microsoft SQ1
2019
8 cores / 8 threads, 3000 Watt
3.67
+150%

Microsoft SQ1 outperforms Core m7-6Y75 by a whopping 150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21591484
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core m7Qualcomm Snapdragon
Power efficiency27.820.12
Architecture codenameSkylake-Y (2015)Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019)
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)2 October 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$393no data

Detailed specifications

Core m7-6Y75 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 cores2 (Dual-core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speed1.2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz3 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier12no data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache256 KB (per core)no data
L3 cache4 MB (shared)2 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Die size98.57 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistors1750 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core m7-6Y75 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
SocketFCBGA1515no data
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt3000 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
vPro+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
TSX+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
SIPP+-
Smart Response+no data

Security technologies

Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+-
SGXYes with Intel® MEno data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth29.861 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 515Qualcomm Adreno 685
Max video memory16 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
DVI+no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution support+no data
Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@24Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP3840x2160@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort3840x2160@60Hzno data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12no data
OpenGL4.5no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core m7-6Y75 and Microsoft SQ1.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes10no 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.

m7-6Y75 1.47
Microsoft SQ1 3.67
+150%

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.

m7-6Y75 2329
Microsoft SQ1 5822
+150%

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.

m7-6Y75 3854
+618%
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.

m7-6Y75 6302
+47.4%
Microsoft SQ1 4276

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.

m7-6Y75 19
Microsoft SQ1 14.2
+33.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.47 3.67
Recency 1 September 2015 2 October 2019
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 3000 Watt

m7-6Y75 has 74900% lower power consumption.

Microsoft SQ1, on the other hand, has a 149.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 300% 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 Core m7-6Y75 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core m7-6Y75 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 Core m7-6Y75
Core m7-6Y75
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 33 votes

Rate Core m7-6Y75 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 Core m7-6Y75 or Microsoft SQ1, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.