Ultra 9 288V vs Microsoft SQ1

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Microsoft SQ1
2019
8 cores / 8 threads, 3000 Watt
3.73
Core Ultra 9 288V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 30 Watt
12.54
+236%

Core Ultra 9 288V outperforms Microsoft SQ1 by a whopping 236% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1484618
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesQualcomm Snapdragonno data
Power efficiency0.1238.82
Architecture codenameCortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date2 October 2019 (5 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads88
Base clock speedno data3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rateno data37 MHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB (per core)
L2 cacheno data2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography7 nm3 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataIntel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)3000 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardQualcomm Adreno 685Arc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

Microsoft SQ1 3.73
Ultra 9 288V 12.54
+236%

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.

Microsoft SQ1 5822
Ultra 9 288V 19542
+236%

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.

Microsoft SQ1 537
Ultra 9 288V 10697
+1892%

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.

Microsoft SQ1 4276
Ultra 9 288V 45377
+961%

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.

Microsoft SQ1 14.2
Ultra 9 288V 9
+57.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.73 12.54
Recency 2 October 2019 24 September 2024
Chip lithography 7 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 3000 Watt 30 Watt

Ultra 9 288V has a 236.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 9900% lower power consumption.

The Core Ultra 9 288V is our recommended choice as it beats the Microsoft SQ1 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Microsoft SQ1 and Core Ultra 9 288V, 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.


Microsoft SQ1
SQ1
Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
Core Ultra 9 288V

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.


3.6 56 votes

Rate Microsoft SQ1 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 10 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 288V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Microsoft SQ1 or Core Ultra 9 288V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.