HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs Unisoc Tiger T310
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and the Unisoc Tiger T310 are two processors with different specifications. Let's compare them based on their key features.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F features 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 core and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While both processors offer multi-core configurations, the Kirin 710F has more cores, totaling 8 compared to the T310's 4 cores. This difference could have an impact on performance, especially in multitasking scenarios.
In terms of the instruction set, both processors support the ARMv8 architecture, but the Kirin 710F is based on the older ARMv8-A, while the Tiger T310 is based on the newer ARMv8.2-A. This means that the T310 could potentially benefit from improved instruction sets and optimizations.
Additionally, both processors share the same 12 nm lithography process, which refers to the size of the transistors on the chip. However, the number of transistors is only specified for the Kirin 710F at 5500 million, while it is not mentioned for the Tiger T310.
Another notable difference is the TDP (Thermal Design Power) rating. The HiSilicon Kirin 710F has a TDP of 5 Watts, while the T310's TDP is not provided. Generally, a lower TDP indicates better power efficiency, which can lead to longer battery life in devices that incorporate these processors.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F stands out with its higher core count and defined TDP rating. However, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has the advantage of being based on a newer ARM architecture. Depending on specific use cases and requirements, one processor may be more suitable than the other. It is recommended to consider factors such as performance needs, power efficiency, and device compatibility when making a choice between these processors.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F features 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.7 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 core and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While both processors offer multi-core configurations, the Kirin 710F has more cores, totaling 8 compared to the T310's 4 cores. This difference could have an impact on performance, especially in multitasking scenarios.
In terms of the instruction set, both processors support the ARMv8 architecture, but the Kirin 710F is based on the older ARMv8-A, while the Tiger T310 is based on the newer ARMv8.2-A. This means that the T310 could potentially benefit from improved instruction sets and optimizations.
Additionally, both processors share the same 12 nm lithography process, which refers to the size of the transistors on the chip. However, the number of transistors is only specified for the Kirin 710F at 5500 million, while it is not mentioned for the Tiger T310.
Another notable difference is the TDP (Thermal Design Power) rating. The HiSilicon Kirin 710F has a TDP of 5 Watts, while the T310's TDP is not provided. Generally, a lower TDP indicates better power efficiency, which can lead to longer battery life in devices that incorporate these processors.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F stands out with its higher core count and defined TDP rating. However, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has the advantage of being based on a newer ARM architecture. Depending on specific use cases and requirements, one processor may be more suitable than the other. It is recommended to consider factors such as performance needs, power efficiency, and device compatibility when making a choice between these processors.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 2 GHz – Cortex-A75 3x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 1333 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Imagination PowerVR GE8300 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Rogue |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 660 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 2 |
Shaders | 64 | 32 |
DirectX | 12 | 10 |
OpenCL API | 2.0 | 3.0 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2340x1080 | 1600x720 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 16MP + 1x 8MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@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 | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | 0.1 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 | 2019 April |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | T310 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 vs Google Tensor G2
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 vs MediaTek Helio G35
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 vs Google Tensor G3
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 vs Samsung Exynos 8890
7
Apple A10X Fusion vs Unisoc SC9863A
8
MediaTek Dimensity 7050 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1300
9
Samsung Exynos 9610 vs Unisoc Tiger T612
10
Apple A14 Bionic vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 821