Microsoft SQ1 vs Phenom X3 8550

Place in the ranking	2679	1487
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.13	no data
Market segment	Desktop processor	Laptop
Series	no data	Qualcomm Snapdragon
Power efficiency	0.72	0.12
Architecture codename	Toliman (2008)	Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019)
Release date	April 2008 (16 years ago)	2 October 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$170	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Phenom X3 8550 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	3 (Tri-Core)	8 (Octa-Core)
Threads	3	8
Boost clock speed	2.2 GHz	3 GHz
L1 cache	128 KB (per core)	no data
L2 cache	512 KB (per core)	no data
L3 cache	2 MB (shared)	2 MB
Chip lithography	65 nm	7 nm
Die size	285 mm²	no data
Number of transistors	450 million	no data
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-

Compatibility

Information on Phenom X3 8550 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	no data
Socket	AM2+	no data
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	3000 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X3 8550 and Microsoft SQ1 are enumerated here.

AMD-V

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.

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.

Phenom X3 8550 0.72

Microsoft SQ1 3.67
+410%

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.

Phenom X3 8550 1151

Microsoft SQ1 5822
+406%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.72	3.67
Physical cores	3	8
Threads	3	8
Chip lithography	65 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	3000 Watt

Phenom X3 8550 has 3057.9% lower power consumption.

Microsoft SQ1, on the other hand, has a 409.7% higher aggregate performance score, 166.7% more physical cores and 166.7% more threads, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

The Microsoft SQ1 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X3 8550 in performance tests.

Note that Phenom X3 8550 is a desktop processor while Microsoft SQ1 is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X3 8550 and Microsoft SQ1, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.