HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs Unisoc Tiger T606
The HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc Tiger T606 are two processors that differ in their specifications. Let's compare them based on their CPU cores and architecture, number of cores, instruction set, lithography, and TDP.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710F, it features an architecture 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 balanced combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores. It runs on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 12 nm. Additionally, it boasts 5500 million transistors and operates on a power consumption of 5 Watts.
Moving on to the Unisoc Tiger T606, it employs an architecture of 2x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Similar to the Kirin 710F, it also has a total of 8 cores. This processor operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and shares the same 12 nm lithography as the Kirin 710F. However, it has a higher power consumption of 10 Watts.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F offers a higher clock speed for its high-performance cores (2.2 GHz Cortex-A73) compared to the Tiger T606 (1.6 GHz Cortex-A75). However, the Tiger T606 has a higher number of high-performance cores (2) compared to the Kirin 710F (0).
Both processors have the same number of cores, but the Kirin 710F offers a more varied architecture with a mix of high-performance and power-efficient cores. On the other hand, the Tiger T606 focuses more on power-efficiency with a higher number of power-efficient cores.
Considering the instruction set, lithography, and TDP, both processors are on the same 12 nm lithography and support the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 710F has a lower TDP of 5 Watts compared to the Tiger T606's 10 Watts.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc Tiger T606 differ in their CPU cores and architecture, TDP, and power consumption. While the Kirin 710F offers a more balanced combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores with a lower TDP, the Tiger T606 focuses more on power efficiency with a higher number of power-efficient cores.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 710F, it features an architecture 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 balanced combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores. It runs on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 12 nm. Additionally, it boasts 5500 million transistors and operates on a power consumption of 5 Watts.
Moving on to the Unisoc Tiger T606, it employs an architecture of 2x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.6 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Similar to the Kirin 710F, it also has a total of 8 cores. This processor operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and shares the same 12 nm lithography as the Kirin 710F. However, it has a higher power consumption of 10 Watts.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 710F offers a higher clock speed for its high-performance cores (2.2 GHz Cortex-A73) compared to the Tiger T606 (1.6 GHz Cortex-A75). However, the Tiger T606 has a higher number of high-performance cores (2) compared to the Kirin 710F (0).
Both processors have the same number of cores, but the Kirin 710F offers a more varied architecture with a mix of high-performance and power-efficient cores. On the other hand, the Tiger T606 focuses more on power-efficiency with a higher number of power-efficient cores.
Considering the instruction set, lithography, and TDP, both processors are on the same 12 nm lithography and support the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 710F has a lower TDP of 5 Watts compared to the Tiger T606's 10 Watts.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 710F and Unisoc Tiger T606 differ in their CPU cores and architecture, TDP, and power consumption. While the Kirin 710F offers a more balanced combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores with a lower TDP, the Tiger T606 focuses more on power efficiency with a higher number of power-efficient cores.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.7 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 1.6 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.6 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 12 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 5500 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 10 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G51 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 650 MHz | 650 MHz |
GPU boost frequency | 1000 MHz | |
Execution units | 4 | 1 |
Shaders | 64 | 16 |
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 | 1600x900@90Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 24MP | 1x 24MP, 16MP + 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 | 2021 October |
Partnumber | Hi6260 | T606 |
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
Apple A10X Fusion vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G
2
MediaTek Dimensity 930 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
3
Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1
4
MediaTek Helio G88 vs MediaTek Dimensity 7050
5
HiSilicon Kirin 710 vs MediaTek Helio G35
6
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
7
Google Tensor G3 vs MediaTek Dimensity 7200
8
MediaTek Dimensity 1200 vs HiSilicon Kirin 810
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
10
Samsung Exynos 8890 vs Samsung Exynos 990