HiSilicon Kirin 710A vs Unisoc SC9832E
The HiSilicon Kirin 710A and the Unisoc SC9832E are two processors with different specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710A, it is built on a 14 nm lithography and has a total of 5500 million transistors. The CPU architecture consists of 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 cores for high-performance tasks and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores that handle low-power processes. This processor utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E is based on a 28 nm lithography and has four Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.4 GHz. While it also uses the ARMv8-A instruction set, it only has a TDP of 7 Watts.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A clearly outperforms the Unisoc SC9832E. With its 8 cores and a combination of high-performance and low-power cores, the Kirin 710A is capable of handling a wider range of tasks efficiently. The Unisoc SC9832E, on the other hand, has only 4 Cortex-A53 cores, limiting its capabilities in terms of multitasking and overall performance.
The HiSilicon Kirin 710A's impressive lithography of 14 nm allows for higher transistor counts, resulting in better power efficiency and overall processing power. The Unisoc SC9832E, with its 28 nm lithography, falls behind in this aspect.
When it comes to TDP, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A has a lower power consumption of 5 Watts, making it more power-efficient compared to the Unisoc SC9832E, which has a TDP of 7 Watts.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A surpasses the Unisoc SC9832E in terms of CPU cores, architecture, lithography, and power efficiency. It presents a more capable and efficient option for smartphones and other devices that require high-performance processors. The Unisoc SC9832E, while still capable, falls behind in terms of overall capabilities and power efficiency.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710A, it is built on a 14 nm lithography and has a total of 5500 million transistors. The CPU architecture consists of 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 cores for high-performance tasks and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores that handle low-power processes. This processor utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E is based on a 28 nm lithography and has four Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.4 GHz. While it also uses the ARMv8-A instruction set, it only has a TDP of 7 Watts.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A clearly outperforms the Unisoc SC9832E. With its 8 cores and a combination of high-performance and low-power cores, the Kirin 710A is capable of handling a wider range of tasks efficiently. The Unisoc SC9832E, on the other hand, has only 4 Cortex-A53 cores, limiting its capabilities in terms of multitasking and overall performance.
The HiSilicon Kirin 710A's impressive lithography of 14 nm allows for higher transistor counts, resulting in better power efficiency and overall processing power. The Unisoc SC9832E, with its 28 nm lithography, falls behind in this aspect.
When it comes to TDP, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A has a lower power consumption of 5 Watts, making it more power-efficient compared to the Unisoc SC9832E, which has a TDP of 7 Watts.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A surpasses the Unisoc SC9832E in terms of CPU cores, architecture, lithography, and power efficiency. It presents a more capable and efficient option for smartphones and other devices that require high-performance processors. The Unisoc SC9832E, while still capable, falls behind in terms of overall capabilities and power efficiency.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 7 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 2 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 667 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Midgard |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 680 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 1 |
Shaders | 64 | 4 |
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 2.0 | 1.2 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 1440x720 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 13MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 0.15 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.05 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 4 (802.11n) |
Bluetooth | 5.1 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 4 | 2018 |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G vs Samsung Exynos 7904
2
HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs MediaTek Helio G36
3
MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G37
4
Apple A11 Bionic vs Samsung Exynos 990
5
Samsung Exynos 7870 vs MediaTek Helio G80
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 vs Unisoc Tanggula T740 5G
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 vs MediaTek Dimensity 930
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765 vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F
9
MediaTek Helio G96 vs Unisoc Tiger T606
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 vs Apple A17 Pro