HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
When comparing the specifications of the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G and the HiSilicon Kirin 980 processors, some notable differences can be seen.
Starting with their CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 820 5G features 1x 2.36 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.22 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. On the other hand, the Kirin 980 offers 2x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76, 2x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Both processors have a total of 8 cores.
In terms of the instruction set, the Kirin 820 5G utilizes ARMv8.2-A, while the Kirin 980 uses ARMv8-A. This implies that the Kirin 820 5G has a more advanced instruction set.
Both processors have a lithography of 7 nm, meaning they have relatively small transistors and can offer improved power efficiency. Additionally, both processors have a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 6 Watts, which refers to the maximum amount of power they generate under typical operating conditions.
When it comes to neural processing, the Kirin 820 5G incorporates the Ascend D110 Lite with the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture. Meanwhile, the Kirin 980 features the HiSilicon Dual NPU (Neural Processing Unit). Although both processors offer neural processing capabilities, the specific architecture and units differ between the two.
However, it is worth mentioning that the Kirin 980 has a higher number of transistors, with 6900 million, suggesting it may have a higher level of complexity and potential performance.
In conclusion, while both the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G and the HiSilicon Kirin 980 processors have some similarities in terms of their lithography, TDP, and the number of CPU cores, they also have distinguishing features. The Kirin 820 5G utilizes a different instruction set and neural processing architecture compared to the Kirin 980, which may result in varying levels of performance and capabilities.
Starting with their CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 820 5G features 1x 2.36 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.22 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. On the other hand, the Kirin 980 offers 2x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76, 2x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Both processors have a total of 8 cores.
In terms of the instruction set, the Kirin 820 5G utilizes ARMv8.2-A, while the Kirin 980 uses ARMv8-A. This implies that the Kirin 820 5G has a more advanced instruction set.
Both processors have a lithography of 7 nm, meaning they have relatively small transistors and can offer improved power efficiency. Additionally, both processors have a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 6 Watts, which refers to the maximum amount of power they generate under typical operating conditions.
When it comes to neural processing, the Kirin 820 5G incorporates the Ascend D110 Lite with the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture. Meanwhile, the Kirin 980 features the HiSilicon Dual NPU (Neural Processing Unit). Although both processors offer neural processing capabilities, the specific architecture and units differ between the two.
However, it is worth mentioning that the Kirin 980 has a higher number of transistors, with 6900 million, suggesting it may have a higher level of complexity and potential performance.
In conclusion, while both the HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G and the HiSilicon Kirin 980 processors have some similarities in terms of their lithography, TDP, and the number of CPU cores, they also have distinguishing features. The Kirin 820 5G utilizes a different instruction set and neural processing architecture compared to the Kirin 980, which may result in varying levels of performance and capabilities.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 2.36 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.22 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A76 2x 1.92 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 7 nm | 7 nm |
Number of transistors | 6900 million | |
TDP | 6 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture | HiSilicon Dual NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 12 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4X | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2133 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G57 MP6 | Mali-G76 MP10 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 850 MHz | 720 MHz |
Execution units | 6 | 10 |
Shaders | 96 | 160 |
DirectX | 12 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 2.1 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 3120x1440 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP | 1x 48MP, 2x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | 4K@30fps |
Video codec support | AV1 H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
AV1 H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 1.6 Gbps | 1.4 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.2 Gbps | 0.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 6 (802.11ax) | 6 (802.11ax) |
Bluetooth | 5.1 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 March | 2018 Quarter 4 |
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
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 vs Apple A17 Pro
4
MediaTek Dimensity 930 vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F
5
MediaTek Helio A25 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
6
Apple A11 Bionic vs MediaTek Helio G90T
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Plus Gen 2
8
MediaTek Helio P35 vs MediaTek Helio G95
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs Samsung Exynos 9611
10
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Samsung Exynos 9825