HiSilicon Kirin 710A vs Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 710A and the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G are two processors with different specifications. Let's compare them based on their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710A, it features an architecture of 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53. With a total of eight cores, it offers a balanced combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores. The instruction set supported by this processor is ARMv8-A, which ensures compatibility with a wide range of software. Built on a 14 nm lithography process, it strikes a good balance between power efficiency and performance. Furthermore, it incorporates around 5500 million transistors and has a power consumption of 5 watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G boasts an advanced architecture with a combination of Cortex-A76 and Cortex-A55 cores. It features 1x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration provides a powerful processing capability to handle demanding tasks. The instruction set supported by this processor is ARMv8.2-A, which includes enhancements over the ARMv8-A. With a smaller lithography of 6 nm, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G offers improved power efficiency and potentially higher performance. It also includes a Neural Processing Unit (NPU), which enables AI-related tasks.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a TDP of 5 watts, indicating that they are designed to operate within a similar power range.
To summarize, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A and the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G differ in terms of their CPU architecture, instruction set, lithography process, and the inclusion of an NPU in the latter. While the HiSilicon Kirin 710A offers a balanced combination of performance and power efficiency, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G includes more powerful Cortex-A76 cores and an NPU for AI-related tasks. The choice between the two processors would depend on specific requirements and priorities, such as power efficiency, processing power, or AI capabilities.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710A, it features an architecture of 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A73 and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53. With a total of eight cores, it offers a balanced combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores. The instruction set supported by this processor is ARMv8-A, which ensures compatibility with a wide range of software. Built on a 14 nm lithography process, it strikes a good balance between power efficiency and performance. Furthermore, it incorporates around 5500 million transistors and has a power consumption of 5 watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G boasts an advanced architecture with a combination of Cortex-A76 and Cortex-A55 cores. It features 1x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration provides a powerful processing capability to handle demanding tasks. The instruction set supported by this processor is ARMv8.2-A, which includes enhancements over the ARMv8-A. With a smaller lithography of 6 nm, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G offers improved power efficiency and potentially higher performance. It also includes a Neural Processing Unit (NPU), which enables AI-related tasks.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a TDP of 5 watts, indicating that they are designed to operate within a similar power range.
To summarize, the HiSilicon Kirin 710A and the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G differ in terms of their CPU architecture, instruction set, lithography process, and the inclusion of an NPU in the latter. While the HiSilicon Kirin 710A offers a balanced combination of performance and power efficiency, the Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G includes more powerful Cortex-A76 cores and an NPU for AI-related tasks. The choice between the two processors would depend on specific requirements and priorities, such as power efficiency, processing power, or AI capabilities.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 14 nm | 6 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 32 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 3.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP6 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 850 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 6 |
Shaders | 64 | 96 |
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 | 2160x1080@120Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 108MP, 2x 24MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 2.7 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 1.5 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.1 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 Quarter 4 | 2021 February |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | T770, Tiger T7520 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 vs Unisoc Tiger T710
2
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Apple A11 Bionic
3
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
4
HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
5
HiSilicon Kirin 980 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 821
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 4G
7
MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G36
8
HiSilicon Kirin 960 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8200
9
Samsung Exynos 9825 vs Apple A10 Fusion
10
HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G vs Apple A12 Bionic