Microsoft SQ1 vs A6-3620

Place in the ranking	2361	1484
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Market segment	Desktop processor	Laptop
Series	no data	Qualcomm Snapdragon
Power efficiency	1.69	0.12
Architecture codename	Llano (2011−2012)	Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019)
Release date	20 December 2011 (12 years ago)	2 October 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3620 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	4 (Quad-Core)	8 (Octa-Core)
Threads	4	8
Base clock speed	2.2 GHz	no data
Boost clock speed	2.5 GHz	3 GHz
L1 cache	128 KB (per core)	no data
L2 cache	1 MB (per core)	no data
L3 cache	0 KB	2 MB
Chip lithography	32 nm	7 nm
Die size	228 mm²	no data
Number of transistors	1,178 million	no data
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-

Compatibility

Information on A6-3620 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	FM1	no data
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	3000 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3620 and Microsoft SQ1 are enumerated here.

AMD-V

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3620 and Microsoft SQ1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types

DDR3

no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card

Radeon HD 6530D

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.

A6-3620 1.16

Microsoft SQ1 3.67
+216%

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.

A6-3620 1848

Microsoft SQ1 5822
+215%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.16	3.67
Recency	20 December 2011	2 October 2019
Physical cores	4	8
Threads	4	8
Chip lithography	32 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	3000 Watt

A6-3620 has 4515.4% lower power consumption.

Microsoft SQ1, on the other hand, has a 216.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 357.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Microsoft SQ1 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3620 in performance tests.

Note that A6-3620 is a desktop processor while Microsoft SQ1 is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3620 and Microsoft SQ1, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.