HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G vs HiSilicon Kirin 950
When comparing the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G and the HiSilicon Kirin 950 processors based on their specifications, several key differences can be identified.
Starting with the CPU architecture, the Kirin 820 5G features a 1x 2.36 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.22 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. In contrast, the Kirin 950 is equipped with 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This suggests that the Kirin 820 5G has a more advanced and diverse CPU architecture compared to the Kirin 950.
Another notable difference is the lithography process. The Kirin 820 5G utilizes a more advanced 7 nm lithography process, while the Kirin 950 uses a 16 nm lithography process. Generally, a smaller lithography process allows for more transistors and better power efficiency, making the Kirin 820 5G potentially more efficient in terms of power consumption.
Speaking of power consumption, the thermal design power (TDP) of the Kirin 820 5G is listed as 6 Watts, whereas the Kirin 950 has a TDP of 5 Watts. This suggests that the Kirin 950 might be more power-efficient than the Kirin 820 5G, although the difference is relatively small.
In terms of instruction set, the Kirin 820 5G adopts ARMv8.2-A, while the Kirin 950 uses ARMv8-A. The Kirin 820 5G's ARMv8.2-A instruction set offers architectural enhancements over the Kirin 950's ARMv8-A instruction set, potentially resulting in improved performance and efficiency.
Lastly, the Kirin 820 5G features the Ascend D110 Lite neural processing and HUAWEI Da Vinci architecture for neural processing tasks, whereas the Kirin 950 does not mention any specific neural processing capabilities.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G appears to be more advanced in terms of CPU architecture, lithography process, and instruction set compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 950. However, the Kirin 950 may have a slight advantage in terms of power efficiency. The inclusion of specific neural processing capabilities is also a notable difference between the two processors.
Starting with the CPU architecture, the Kirin 820 5G features a 1x 2.36 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.22 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. In contrast, the Kirin 950 is equipped with 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This suggests that the Kirin 820 5G has a more advanced and diverse CPU architecture compared to the Kirin 950.
Another notable difference is the lithography process. The Kirin 820 5G utilizes a more advanced 7 nm lithography process, while the Kirin 950 uses a 16 nm lithography process. Generally, a smaller lithography process allows for more transistors and better power efficiency, making the Kirin 820 5G potentially more efficient in terms of power consumption.
Speaking of power consumption, the thermal design power (TDP) of the Kirin 820 5G is listed as 6 Watts, whereas the Kirin 950 has a TDP of 5 Watts. This suggests that the Kirin 950 might be more power-efficient than the Kirin 820 5G, although the difference is relatively small.
In terms of instruction set, the Kirin 820 5G adopts ARMv8.2-A, while the Kirin 950 uses ARMv8-A. The Kirin 820 5G's ARMv8.2-A instruction set offers architectural enhancements over the Kirin 950's ARMv8-A instruction set, potentially resulting in improved performance and efficiency.
Lastly, the Kirin 820 5G features the Ascend D110 Lite neural processing and HUAWEI Da Vinci architecture for neural processing tasks, whereas the Kirin 950 does not mention any specific neural processing capabilities.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G appears to be more advanced in terms of CPU architecture, lithography process, and instruction set compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 950. However, the Kirin 950 may have a slight advantage in terms of power efficiency. The inclusion of specific neural processing capabilities is also a notable difference between the two processors.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.36 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.22 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 7 nm | 16 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | |
TDP | 6 Watt | 5 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 12 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4 |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 1333 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G57 MP6 | Mali-T880 MP4 |
GPU Architecture | Mali Valhall | Mali Midgard |
GPU frequency | 850 MHz | 900 MHz |
Execution units | 6 | 4 |
Shaders | 96 | 64 |
DirectX | 12 | 11.2 |
OpenCL API | 2.1 | 1.2 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | AV1 H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 1.6 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.2 Gbps | 0.05 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 6 (802.11ax) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.1 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 March | 2015 November |
Partnumber | Hi3650 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Flagship |
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 8895 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 3
2
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
3
MediaTek Helio G36 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G
4
Apple A16 Bionic vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
5
MediaTek Dimensity 6400 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 685
6
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Samsung Exynos 7904
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 Plus vs Unisoc Tiger T616
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
9
HiSilicon Kirin 960 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 860
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 435