HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs HiSilicon Kirin 960
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and HiSilicon Kirin 960 are two processors that target different segments of the market. While both processors are designed by HiSilicon and utilize ARMv8-A instruction set architecture, there are notable differences in their specifications.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F features a configuration of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Kirin 960 boasts a slightly higher performance with 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This indicates that the Kirin 960 will have a slight advantage in processing speed and multitasking capabilities.
When it comes to lithography, the Kirin 710F employs a 12 nm process, while the Kirin 960 adopts a 16 nm process. Smaller lithography typically translates to better power efficiency and potentially better thermal performance. Therefore, the Kirin 710F may have a slight edge in terms of power consumption.
In terms of the number of transistors, the Kirin 710F incorporates 5500 million transistors, whereas the Kirin 960 utilizes 4000 million transistors. A higher number of transistors usually indicates a more complex and feature-rich design, which can result in better overall performance. Therefore, the Kirin 710F may offer superior performance compared to the Kirin 960.
Both processors have a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts. This suggests that they are designed to operate efficiently within a similar power envelope. Therefore, in terms of power consumption, these processors are on par with each other.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F excels in terms of lithography and transistor count, potentially offering better power efficiency and overall performance. Conversely, the HiSilicon Kirin 960 outperforms the Kirin 710F in CPU clock speeds, indicating better processing capabilities. Ultimately, the choice between these processors will depend on the specific requirements of the device or application in which they are used.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F features a configuration of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Kirin 960 boasts a slightly higher performance with 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This indicates that the Kirin 960 will have a slight advantage in processing speed and multitasking capabilities.
When it comes to lithography, the Kirin 710F employs a 12 nm process, while the Kirin 960 adopts a 16 nm process. Smaller lithography typically translates to better power efficiency and potentially better thermal performance. Therefore, the Kirin 710F may have a slight edge in terms of power consumption.
In terms of the number of transistors, the Kirin 710F incorporates 5500 million transistors, whereas the Kirin 960 utilizes 4000 million transistors. A higher number of transistors usually indicates a more complex and feature-rich design, which can result in better overall performance. Therefore, the Kirin 710F may offer superior performance compared to the Kirin 960.
Both processors have a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts. This suggests that they are designed to operate efficiently within a similar power envelope. Therefore, in terms of power consumption, these processors are on par with each other.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F excels in terms of lithography and transistor count, potentially offering better power efficiency and overall performance. Conversely, the HiSilicon Kirin 960 outperforms the Kirin 710F in CPU clock speeds, indicating better processing capabilities. Ultimately, the choice between these processors will depend on the specific requirements of the device or application in which they are used.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 16 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | 4000 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4 |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G71 MP8 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 900 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 8 |
Shaders | 64 | 128 |
DirectX | 12 | 11.3 |
OpenCL API | 2.0 | 1.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 20MP, 2x 12MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 0.6 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.15 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 | 2016 October |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | Hi3660 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Flagship |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 2100 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1080
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 Plus
3
Unisoc SC7731E vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G
4
Unisoc Tiger T618 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 665
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2
6
MediaTek Helio G90 vs Apple A17 Pro
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
8
MediaTek Helio G95 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1100
9
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Samsung Exynos 9610
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 vs MediaTek Helio G96