HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs Unisoc SC9832E
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc SC9832E are two processors with different specifications. Let's compare these two processors based on their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710F, it features an architecture consisting of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers a good balance of high-performance and power efficiency. The Kirin 710F is based on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 12 nm. It also has a significant number of transistors, with 5500 million, indicating a higher level of complexity. The thermal design power (TDP) of this processor is 5 Watts, which means it consumes less power and generates less heat.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E has a different architecture, comprising 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With only 4 cores, this processor may not offer the same level of multitasking capability as the Kirin 710F. It also uses the ARMv8-A instruction set and operates at a lithography of 28 nm. The SC9832E has a TDP of 7 Watts, indicating a higher power consumption compared to the Kirin 710F.
In terms of performance and power efficiency, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F has an advantage with its higher clock speeds, additional cores, and smaller lithography size. The additional cores and higher clock speeds allow for better multitasking and faster processing. The smaller lithography size contributes to better power efficiency, as less energy is wasted in the form of heat compared to the Unisoc SC9832E.
To summarize, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F outperforms the Unisoc SC9832E in terms of specifications. The Kirin 710F offers a higher number of cores, higher clock speeds, a smaller lithography size, and consumes less power. These specifications make it a more powerful and efficient processor compared to the SC9832E.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710F, it features an architecture consisting of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers a good balance of high-performance and power efficiency. The Kirin 710F is based on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 12 nm. It also has a significant number of transistors, with 5500 million, indicating a higher level of complexity. The thermal design power (TDP) of this processor is 5 Watts, which means it consumes less power and generates less heat.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E has a different architecture, comprising 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With only 4 cores, this processor may not offer the same level of multitasking capability as the Kirin 710F. It also uses the ARMv8-A instruction set and operates at a lithography of 28 nm. The SC9832E has a TDP of 7 Watts, indicating a higher power consumption compared to the Kirin 710F.
In terms of performance and power efficiency, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F has an advantage with its higher clock speeds, additional cores, and smaller lithography size. The additional cores and higher clock speeds allow for better multitasking and faster processing. The smaller lithography size contributes to better power efficiency, as less energy is wasted in the form of heat compared to the Unisoc SC9832E.
To summarize, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F outperforms the Unisoc SC9832E in terms of specifications. The Kirin 710F offers a higher number of cores, higher clock speeds, a smaller lithography size, and consumes less power. These specifications make it a more powerful and efficient processor compared to the SC9832E.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
| Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
| Lithography | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
| TDP | 5 Watt | 7 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
| Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 2 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
| Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 667 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 2x32 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Bifrost | Mali Midgard |
| GPU frequency | 1000 MHz | 680 MHz |
| Execution units | 4 | 1 |
| Shaders | 64 | 4 |
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| OpenCL API | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
| Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
| Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 1440x720 |
| Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 13MP |
| Max Video Capture | FullHD@30fps | |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
| 4G network | Yes | Yes |
| 5G network | Yes | Yes |
| Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 0.15 Gbps |
| Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.05 Gbps |
| Wi-Fi | 4 (802.11n) | 4 (802.11n) |
| Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
| Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
| Launch Date | 2019 Quarter 1 | 2018 |
| Partnumber | Hi6260 | |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Mid-end | Low-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
Apple M3 (iPad) vs Samsung Exynos 2100
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 6s Gen 4 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 4
3
MediaTek Helio P95 vs Apple A19
4
Unisoc Tiger T612 vs Unisoc T8300
5
HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7s Gen 2
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 vs MediaTek Helio G85
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 870
8
MediaTek Dimensity 930 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
9
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs Unisoc Tiger T616
10
MediaTek Dimensity 720 vs Samsung Exynos 9820