HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G are both powerful processors found in smartphones. Let's compare their specifications to determine which is superior.
Starting with the Kirin 710F, it is built on a 12 nm lithography and features 8 cores. These cores consist of 4 Cortex-A73 cores running at 2.2 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores running at 1.7 GHz. This processor utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a TDP of 5 Watts. It is also equipped with 5500 million transistors.
Moving on to the Kirin 985 5G, it is built on a more advanced 7 nm lithography. Like the Kirin 710F, it also has 8 cores. However, its core configuration is different. It consists of 1 Cortex-A76 core running at 2.58 GHz, 3 Cortex-A76 cores running at 2.4 GHz, and 4 Cortex-A55 cores running at 1.84 GHz. This processor utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a slightly higher TDP of 6 Watts. Notably, it features neural processing capabilities with the Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny and HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture.
Comparing the two processors, it is clear that the Kirin 985 5G has some noticeable advantages. Firstly, it is built on a more advanced 7 nm lithography, which offers improved power efficiency and performance. Additionally, its core configuration includes more powerful cores, such as the Cortex-A76. This suggests that the Kirin 985 5G will deliver better performance and faster processing speeds compared to the Kirin 710F.
Furthermore, the inclusion of neural processing capabilities in the Kirin 985 5G indicates its ability to handle AI tasks more efficiently. This is particularly useful for advanced features like facial recognition, augmented reality, and other AI-related tasks.
In conclusion, while the HiSilicon Kirin 710F is a capable processor, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G is a clear winner when it comes to overall specifications. With a more advanced lithography, higher-performing cores, and neural processing capabilities, the Kirin 985 5G offers superior performance and efficiency, making it an excellent choice for high-end smartphones.
Starting with the Kirin 710F, it is built on a 12 nm lithography and features 8 cores. These cores consist of 4 Cortex-A73 cores running at 2.2 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores running at 1.7 GHz. This processor utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a TDP of 5 Watts. It is also equipped with 5500 million transistors.
Moving on to the Kirin 985 5G, it is built on a more advanced 7 nm lithography. Like the Kirin 710F, it also has 8 cores. However, its core configuration is different. It consists of 1 Cortex-A76 core running at 2.58 GHz, 3 Cortex-A76 cores running at 2.4 GHz, and 4 Cortex-A55 cores running at 1.84 GHz. This processor utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a slightly higher TDP of 6 Watts. Notably, it features neural processing capabilities with the Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny and HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture.
Comparing the two processors, it is clear that the Kirin 985 5G has some noticeable advantages. Firstly, it is built on a more advanced 7 nm lithography, which offers improved power efficiency and performance. Additionally, its core configuration includes more powerful cores, such as the Cortex-A76. This suggests that the Kirin 985 5G will deliver better performance and faster processing speeds compared to the Kirin 710F.
Furthermore, the inclusion of neural processing capabilities in the Kirin 985 5G indicates its ability to handle AI tasks more efficiently. This is particularly useful for advanced features like facial recognition, augmented reality, and other AI-related tasks.
In conclusion, while the HiSilicon Kirin 710F is a capable processor, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G is a clear winner when it comes to overall specifications. With a more advanced lithography, higher-performing cores, and neural processing capabilities, the Kirin 985 5G offers superior performance and efficiency, making it an excellent choice for high-end smartphones.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 2.58 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 7 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 12 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 3.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G77 MP8 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 700 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 8 |
Shaders | 64 | 128 |
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 20MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fp | |
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 | 1.4 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2019 Quarter 1 | 2020 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | Hi6290 |
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
Unisoc SC7731E vs MediaTek Dimensity 9200
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs MediaTek Helio P90
3
HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480
4
Samsung Exynos 8895 vs MediaTek Helio P65
5
MediaTek Dimensity 1300 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 690
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 675
7
MediaTek Helio G95 vs Unisoc Tiger T612
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
9
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 4G