HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G are both processors with their own unique specifications and features. Let's compare them in terms of their CPU cores and architectures, lithography, TDP, and additional functionalities.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F has a mix of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Tanggula T770 5G features a more diverse architecture with 1x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This means that the Tanggula T770 5G might offer better performance in handling more intensive tasks due to its higher clock speeds and more powerful cores.
Moving on to lithography, the Kirin 710F is manufactured using a 12 nm process, while the Tanggula T770 5G takes advantage of a more advanced 6 nm lithography. This indicates that the Tanggula processor is likely to be more power-efficient and potentially generate less heat.
In terms of TDP (Thermal Design Power), both processors have a TDP rating of 5 Watts. This means that they are designed to operate within a similar power consumption range, which is beneficial for devices that prioritize energy efficiency and longer battery life.
Additional functionality-wise, the Tanggula T770 5G stands out with its Neural Processing Unit (NPU). The NPU enables the processor to perform tasks related to artificial intelligence and machine learning more efficiently. This can result in improved facial recognition, better camera features, and enhanced AI capabilities in smartphones or other devices utilizing the processor.
Overall, while the HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G are both 8-core processors, they differ in terms of their CPU architecture, lithography process, and additional functionalities. The Tanggula T770 5G offers a more diverse core setup, a more advanced lithography process, and the added benefit of an NPU. These specifications suggest that the Tanggula T770 5G might provide better performance and power efficiency, especially in tasks that require higher computational power or AI-related functions.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F has a mix of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Tanggula T770 5G features a more diverse architecture with 1x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This means that the Tanggula T770 5G might offer better performance in handling more intensive tasks due to its higher clock speeds and more powerful cores.
Moving on to lithography, the Kirin 710F is manufactured using a 12 nm process, while the Tanggula T770 5G takes advantage of a more advanced 6 nm lithography. This indicates that the Tanggula processor is likely to be more power-efficient and potentially generate less heat.
In terms of TDP (Thermal Design Power), both processors have a TDP rating of 5 Watts. This means that they are designed to operate within a similar power consumption range, which is beneficial for devices that prioritize energy efficiency and longer battery life.
Additional functionality-wise, the Tanggula T770 5G stands out with its Neural Processing Unit (NPU). The NPU enables the processor to perform tasks related to artificial intelligence and machine learning more efficiently. This can result in improved facial recognition, better camera features, and enhanced AI capabilities in smartphones or other devices utilizing the processor.
Overall, while the HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc Tanggula T770 5G are both 8-core processors, they differ in terms of their CPU architecture, lithography process, and additional functionalities. The Tanggula T770 5G offers a more diverse core setup, a more advanced lithography process, and the added benefit of an NPU. These specifications suggest that the Tanggula T770 5G might provide better performance and power efficiency, especially in tasks that require higher computational power or AI-related functions.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 6 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 32 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 3.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP6 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 850 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 6 |
Shaders | 64 | 96 |
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 | 2160x1080@120Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 108MP, 2x 24MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@30fps | |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | 2.7 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 1.5 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 | 2021 February |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | T770, Tiger T7520 |
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
MediaTek Helio G36 vs MediaTek Helio G35
2
MediaTek Helio P35 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1100
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs Samsung Exynos 9609
4
Samsung Exynos 8895 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9200
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1
6
MediaTek Helio G96 vs Samsung Exynos 7870
7
MediaTek Helio G90T vs MediaTek Helio G35
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 690 vs MediaTek Dimensity 700
9
Unisoc Tiger T606 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
10
MediaTek Dimensity 1050 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1