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.
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 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 | Mali Bifrost | Mali Midgard |
| GPU frequency | 1000 MHz | 680 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 |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G
2
MediaTek Dimensity 9200 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G92 Max
3
MediaTek Dimensity 9400e vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820
4
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 712
5
MediaTek Helio P35 vs MediaTek Dimensity 7200
6
HiSilicon Kirin 9020 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6300
8
MediaTek Dimensity 9400 vs MediaTek Helio G88
9
Samsung Exynos 850 vs Apple A13 Bionic
10
MediaTek Dimensity 700 vs Google Tensor G5