HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G vs HiSilicon Kirin 955
The HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G and HiSilicon Kirin 955 are two processors offering different specifications and features. Let's compare them based on their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G, it features a more advanced architecture compared to the Kirin 955. This includes 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 955 consists of 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores.
The number of cores is the same for both processors, being 8, but the Kirin 820 5G provides a more diverse and efficient mix of cores for better performance across various tasks. It also offers the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, while the Kirin 955 utilizes ARMv8-A instruction set.
In terms of manufacturing technology, the Kirin 820 5G has an advantage with its 7 nm lithography, which allows for better power efficiency and heat management. The Kirin 955, on the other hand, has a 16 nm lithography, which is not as advanced.
The Neural Processing capabilities of the two processors also vary. The Kirin 820 5G integrates Ascend D110 Lite and HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture, providing improved AI performance. The Kirin 955 does not mention any specific neural processing features.
In terms of power consumption, the Kirin 955 has a slightly lower TDP (thermal design power) of 5 Watts compared to the Kirin 820 5G with a TDP of 6 Watts. Lower TDP generally results in better energy efficiency.
To summarize, the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G stands out with its more advanced architecture, diverse core configuration, improved neural processing capabilities, and better power efficiency thanks to its 7 nm lithography. However, the Kirin 955 still offers decent performance with its combination of Cortex-A72 and Cortex-A53 cores.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G, it features a more advanced architecture compared to the Kirin 955. This includes 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 955 consists of 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores.
The number of cores is the same for both processors, being 8, but the Kirin 820 5G provides a more diverse and efficient mix of cores for better performance across various tasks. It also offers the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, while the Kirin 955 utilizes ARMv8-A instruction set.
In terms of manufacturing technology, the Kirin 820 5G has an advantage with its 7 nm lithography, which allows for better power efficiency and heat management. The Kirin 955, on the other hand, has a 16 nm lithography, which is not as advanced.
The Neural Processing capabilities of the two processors also vary. The Kirin 820 5G integrates Ascend D110 Lite and HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture, providing improved AI performance. The Kirin 955 does not mention any specific neural processing features.
In terms of power consumption, the Kirin 955 has a slightly lower TDP (thermal design power) of 5 Watts compared to the Kirin 820 5G with a TDP of 6 Watts. Lower TDP generally results in better energy efficiency.
To summarize, the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G stands out with its more advanced architecture, diverse core configuration, improved neural processing capabilities, and better power efficiency thanks to its 7 nm lithography. However, the Kirin 955 still offers decent performance with its combination of Cortex-A72 and Cortex-A53 cores.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.36 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.22 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
4x 2.5 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 | Valhall | 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 | 2016 April |
Partnumber | Hi3655 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Flagship |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G
2
MediaTek Dimensity 7050 vs MediaTek Helio P35
3
HiSilicon Kirin 990 4G vs MediaTek Dimensity 1200
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6020
5
MediaTek Helio G70 vs MediaTek Dimensity 810
6
MediaTek Helio G88 vs Samsung Exynos 980
7
Apple A15 Bionic vs HiSilicon Kirin 950
8
MediaTek Dimensity 7200 vs MediaTek Helio P70
9
MediaTek Dimensity 9000 vs Samsung Exynos 2200
10
Samsung Exynos 9611 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 845