HiSilicon Kirin 710A vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
The HiSilicon Kirin 710A and MediaTek Dimensity 820 are two processors that cater to different segments of the market. Let's compare their specifications to see how they differ.
In terms of architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A boasts 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 820 takes it up a notch with 4x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This indicates that the Dimensity 820 has slightly faster and more efficient cores compared to the Kirin 710A.
Both processors have 8 cores, ensuring smooth multitasking and efficient performance. However, the Dimensity 820 comes with an additional feature - its Neural Processing Unit (NPU). This NPU allows for enhanced AI performance, enabling features like smart photography and efficient power management.
Moving on to the lithography, the Kirin 710A is based on a 14 nm process while the Dimensity 820 utilizes a more advanced 7 nm process. The smaller lithography of the Dimensity 820 indicates better power efficiency and potentially superior overall performance.
When it comes to power consumption, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A has a TDP of 5 watts, while the MediaTek Dimensity 820 has a slightly higher TDP of 10 watts. This suggests that the Kirin 710A is more power-efficient than the Dimensity 820, which could be a crucial factor for some users.
In conclusion, the MediaTek Dimensity 820 outshines the HiSilicon Kirin 710A in terms of CPU cores, architecture, lithography, and the inclusion of an NPU. However, the Kirin 710A has a lower TDP, indicating superior power efficiency. Ultimately, the choice between these two processors will depend on specific user requirements and priorities, such as AI capabilities, power consumption, and overall performance.
In terms of architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A boasts 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the MediaTek Dimensity 820 takes it up a notch with 4x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76 cores and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This indicates that the Dimensity 820 has slightly faster and more efficient cores compared to the Kirin 710A.
Both processors have 8 cores, ensuring smooth multitasking and efficient performance. However, the Dimensity 820 comes with an additional feature - its Neural Processing Unit (NPU). This NPU allows for enhanced AI performance, enabling features like smart photography and efficient power management.
Moving on to the lithography, the Kirin 710A is based on a 14 nm process while the Dimensity 820 utilizes a more advanced 7 nm process. The smaller lithography of the Dimensity 820 indicates better power efficiency and potentially superior overall performance.
When it comes to power consumption, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A has a TDP of 5 watts, while the MediaTek Dimensity 820 has a slightly higher TDP of 10 watts. This suggests that the Kirin 710A is more power-efficient than the Dimensity 820, which could be a crucial factor for some users.
In conclusion, the MediaTek Dimensity 820 outshines the HiSilicon Kirin 710A in terms of CPU cores, architecture, lithography, and the inclusion of an NPU. However, the Kirin 710A has a lower TDP, indicating superior power efficiency. Ultimately, the choice between these two processors will depend on specific user requirements and priorities, such as AI capabilities, power consumption, and overall performance.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
| Architecture | 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| Lithography | 14 nm | 7 nm |
| Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
| TDP | 5 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
| Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 16 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.2 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP5 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Bifrost | Mali Valhall |
| GPU frequency | 1000 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Execution units | 4 | 5 |
| Shaders | 64 | 80 |
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| OpenCL API | 2.0 | 2.1 |
| OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
| Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
| Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 2520x1080@120Hz |
| Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 80MP, 1x 32MP + 1x 16MP |
| Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | 4K@30fps |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP9 |
Wireless
| 4G network | Yes | Yes |
| 5G network | Yes | Yes |
| Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 2.77 Gbps |
| Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 1.2 Gbps |
| Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 5 (802.11ac) |
| Bluetooth | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS QZSS |
Supplemental Information
| Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 4 | 2020 May |
| Partnumber | Hi6260 | MT6875 |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Mid-end | Mid-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1
2
Unisoc T9100 vs Apple A18 Pro
3
HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G vs MediaTek Helio G90T
4
MediaTek Dimensity 9400 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
5
Samsung Exynos 9611 vs Samsung Exynos 2200
6
MediaTek Dimensity 9400 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G88
7
MediaTek Helio G200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 860
8
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 782G vs MediaTek Helio G92 Max
10
Samsung Exynos 7904 vs Samsung Exynos 2100