Pentium 8505 (IPU) vs Ambiq Apollo 3.5

VS

Primary details

Comparing Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU) processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Architecture codenameCortex-M4FAlder Lake-U (2022)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)23 February 2022 (2 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU) 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 cores1 (Single-Core)5 (Penta-Core)
Threads16
Base clock speedno data1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1/1 GHz4.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data80K (per core)
L2 cacheno data1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography40 nm10 nm
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU) 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 1744
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU). You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

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

Security technologies

Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU) technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU) are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU). Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel UHD Graphics 48EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU).

PCIe versionno data4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 5
Threads 1 6
Chip lithography 40 nm 10 nm

Pentium 8505 (IPU) has 400% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU). We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ambiq Apollo 3.5 and Pentium 8505 (IPU), 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.


Ambiq Apollo 3.5
Ambiq Apollo 3.5
Intel Pentium 8505 (IPU)
Pentium 8505 (IPU)

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.


3.4 75 votes

Rate Ambiq Apollo 3.5 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 18 votes

Rate Pentium 8505 (IPU) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ambiq Apollo 3.5 or Pentium 8505 (IPU), agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.