HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs HiSilicon Kirin 930
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Kirin 930 are both processors but differ in their specifications. Let's take a closer look at each processor to compare their features.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710F, it utilizes a 12 nm lithography, which means it offers a more advanced manufacturing process, resulting in improved power efficiency and better performance. The CPU architecture consists of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, providing a balanced blend of high-performance and power-saving capabilities. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers multi-tasking capabilities, allowing efficient handling of various computing tasks. Additionally, it is built on the ARMv8-A instruction set, providing compatibility with modern software and applications. The total number of transistors is 5500 million, indicating a high level of integration for improved performance. The power consumption, known as the TDP, is 5 Watts, indicating relatively low power usage.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 has different specifications. It features a 28 nm lithography, which is less advanced compared to the Kirin 710F. This may result in comparatively lower power efficiency and lower overall performance. The CPU architecture of the Kirin 930 consists of 4x 2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. While it still offers 8 cores like the Kirin 710F, the clock speeds are lower, which may affect its performance in more demanding tasks. Similar to the Kirin 710F, it also utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set for software compatibility. However, the number of transistors is lower at 1000 million, implying less integration compared to the Kirin 710F. The power consumption of the Kirin 930 is also 5 Watts.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F offers a more advanced manufacturing process, higher clock speeds for both high-performance and power-saving cores, a greater number of transistors, and a more power-efficient lithography. On the other hand, the Kirin 930 has a less advanced manufacturing process, lower clock speeds, fewer transistors, and a less power-efficient lithography. Choosing between these two processors would depend on the specific requirements of the device and the intended usage.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710F, it utilizes a 12 nm lithography, which means it offers a more advanced manufacturing process, resulting in improved power efficiency and better performance. The CPU architecture consists of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, providing a balanced blend of high-performance and power-saving capabilities. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers multi-tasking capabilities, allowing efficient handling of various computing tasks. Additionally, it is built on the ARMv8-A instruction set, providing compatibility with modern software and applications. The total number of transistors is 5500 million, indicating a high level of integration for improved performance. The power consumption, known as the TDP, is 5 Watts, indicating relatively low power usage.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 has different specifications. It features a 28 nm lithography, which is less advanced compared to the Kirin 710F. This may result in comparatively lower power efficiency and lower overall performance. The CPU architecture of the Kirin 930 consists of 4x 2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. While it still offers 8 cores like the Kirin 710F, the clock speeds are lower, which may affect its performance in more demanding tasks. Similar to the Kirin 710F, it also utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set for software compatibility. However, the number of transistors is lower at 1000 million, implying less integration compared to the Kirin 710F. The power consumption of the Kirin 930 is also 5 Watts.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F offers a more advanced manufacturing process, higher clock speeds for both high-performance and power-saving cores, a greater number of transistors, and a more power-efficient lithography. On the other hand, the Kirin 930 has a less advanced manufacturing process, lower clock speeds, fewer transistors, and a less power-efficient lithography. Choosing between these two processors would depend on the specific requirements of the device and the intended usage.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 28 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | 1000 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 800 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-T628 MP4 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Midgard |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 600 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 4 |
Shaders | 64 | 64 |
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 2.0 | 1.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 2560x1600 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 20MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.05 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2019 Quarter 1 | 2015 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | Hi3630 |
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
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G
2
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs MediaTek Helio P65
3
Samsung Exynos 9825 vs HiSilicon Kirin 810
4
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G Plus
5
Apple A16 Bionic vs MediaTek Helio G90T
6
Unisoc Tiger T618 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G
7
MediaTek Dimensity 820 vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F
8
Unisoc Tiger T310 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 vs MediaTek Helio G85
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 vs Samsung Exynos 9611