HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and HiSilicon Kirin 980 are two processors designed by HiSilicon, each with its own set of specifications and features.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F features 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Kirin 980 boasts 2x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, 2x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. With a greater number of high-performance cores, the Kirin 980 offers better processing power and multitasking capabilities compared to the Kirin 710F.
Another aspect to consider is the lithography, which refers to the size of the transistors on the chip. The Kirin 710F has a 12 nm lithography, while the Kirin 980 boasts a more advanced 7 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally allows for better power efficiency and performance.
In terms of transistor count, the Kirin 980 again comes out on top with 6900 million transistors, while the Kirin 710F has 5500 million transistors. A higher transistor count generally indicates a more powerful and efficient processor.
When it comes to power consumption, the Kirin 710F has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watts, while the Kirin 980 has a slightly higher TDP of 6 Watts. This means the Kirin 710F may be slightly more power-efficient compared to the Kirin 980.
One notable feature of the Kirin 980 is its HiSilicon Dual NPU (Neural Processing Unit), which aids in AI and machine learning tasks. The Kirin 710F does not have a dedicated NPU, which means it may not perform as well in AI-related tasks.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 outperforms the Kirin 710F in terms of CPU architecture, lithography, transistor count, and AI capabilities. However, it is worth noting that the Kirin 710F may offer better power efficiency. The choice between the two processors would depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F features 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Kirin 980 boasts 2x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, 2x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. With a greater number of high-performance cores, the Kirin 980 offers better processing power and multitasking capabilities compared to the Kirin 710F.
Another aspect to consider is the lithography, which refers to the size of the transistors on the chip. The Kirin 710F has a 12 nm lithography, while the Kirin 980 boasts a more advanced 7 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally allows for better power efficiency and performance.
In terms of transistor count, the Kirin 980 again comes out on top with 6900 million transistors, while the Kirin 710F has 5500 million transistors. A higher transistor count generally indicates a more powerful and efficient processor.
When it comes to power consumption, the Kirin 710F has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watts, while the Kirin 980 has a slightly higher TDP of 6 Watts. This means the Kirin 710F may be slightly more power-efficient compared to the Kirin 980.
One notable feature of the Kirin 980 is its HiSilicon Dual NPU (Neural Processing Unit), which aids in AI and machine learning tasks. The Kirin 710F does not have a dedicated NPU, which means it may not perform as well in AI-related tasks.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 outperforms the Kirin 710F in terms of CPU architecture, lithography, transistor count, and AI capabilities. However, it is worth noting that the Kirin 710F may offer better power efficiency. The choice between the two processors would depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A76 2x 1.92 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 7 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | 6900 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon Dual NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G76 MP10 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 720 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 10 |
Shaders | 64 | 160 |
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 | 3120x1440 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 48MP, 2x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
AV1 H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 1.4 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 6 (802.11ax) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2019 Quarter 1 | 2018 Quarter 4 |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | |
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
Unisoc Tiger T700 vs MediaTek Helio G85
2
Google Tensor G1 vs MediaTek Helio G36
3
MediaTek Helio P95 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1200
4
MediaTek Helio G37 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 712
5
HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8000
6
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G vs Unisoc SC9863A
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
8
Samsung Exynos 7420 vs Google Tensor G2
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G vs Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G
10
MediaTek Dimensity 720 vs MediaTek Helio G35