Microsoft SQ1 vs Xeon X5660

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Microsoft SQ1 vs Xeon X5660 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Microsoft SQ1 vs Xeon X5660: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Microsoft SQ1

2019

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $919 less on MSRP ($300 MSRP vs $1,219 MSRP).
✅Delivers 310.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 20.1 vs 4.9 PassMark/$ ($300 MSRP vs $1,219 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon X5660, which brings 6 cores / 12 threads.

Xeon X5660

2010

Why buy it

✅+500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 6 cores / 12 threads.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (5,979 vs 6,039).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 4.9 vs 20.1 PassMark/$ ($1,219 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Microsoft SQ1 better than Xeon X5660?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon X5660 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Microsoft SQ1 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Microsoft SQ1 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 8 cores and 8 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Microsoft SQ1 is the better buy right now. Microsoft SQ1 comes in $919 cheaper on MSRP at $300 MSRP versus $1,219 MSRP, and it still gives you 1% better PassMark. The compromise is that Xeon X5660 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.6% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 310.4% better value on MSRP (20.1 vs 4.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Microsoft SQ1 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 8 cores / 8 threads instead of 6/12. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Microsoft SQ1 vs Xeon X5660 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Microsoft SQ1

The Microsoft SQ1 is manufactured by Microsoft. It was released in 2 October 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019) architecture. It features 8 cores and 8 threads. Max frequency: 3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. Built on 7 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): + 2 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 6,039 points. Launch price was $149.

Xeon X5660

The Xeon X5660 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 16 March 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Westmere-EP (2010−2011) architecture. It features 6 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 5,979 points. Launch price was $33.

⚡

Processing Power

The Microsoft SQ1 packs 8 cores / 8 threads, while the Xeon X5660 offers 6 cores / 12 threads — the Microsoft SQ1 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Microsoft SQ1 versus 3.2 GHz on the Xeon X5660 — a 6.5% clock advantage for the Xeon X5660. The Microsoft SQ1 uses the Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019) architecture (7 nm), while the Xeon X5660 uses Westmere-EP (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Microsoft SQ1 scores 6,039 against the Xeon X5660's 5,979 — a 1% lead for the Microsoft SQ1. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Microsoft SQ1 vs 12 MB (total) on the Xeon X5660.

Feature	Microsoft SQ1	Xeon X5660
Cores / Threads	8 / 8+33%	6 / 12
Boost Clock	3 GHz	3.2 GHz+7%
Base Clock	—	2.8 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB	12 MB (total)+500%
L2 Cache	—	256 kB (per core)
Process	7 nm-78%	32 nm
Architecture	Cortex-A76 / A55 (Kryo 495) (2019)	Westmere-EP (2010−2011)
PassMark	6,039+1%	5,979

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Microsoft SQ1) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon X5660). Primary use case: Xeon X5660 targets Workstation. Direct competitor: Xeon X5660 rivals Core i7-980X.

Feature	Microsoft SQ1	Xeon X5660
Integrated GPU	—	No
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	—	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Microsoft SQ1 was priced at $300, while the Xeon X5660 came in at $1219. On launch pricing ($300 vs $1219), Microsoft SQ1 was $919 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Microsoft SQ1 delivers 20.1 pts/$ vs 4.9 pts/$ for the Xeon X5660 — making the Microsoft SQ1 the 121.6% better value option.

Feature	Microsoft SQ1	Xeon X5660
MSRP	$300-75%	$1219
Performance per Dollar	20.1+310%	4.9
Release Date	2019	2010

Search Microsoft SQ1 on Amazon

Search Xeon X5660 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.