HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T310
Comparing the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T310 processors, we can see some significant differences in their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G, it features a more advanced architecture that includes 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This allows for a higher level of multitasking and overall better performance. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has a less powerful architecture with 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 core and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While still capable, it may struggle with demanding tasks.
In terms of the number of cores, the Kirin 9000 5G comes out on top with 8 cores, providing better performance and efficiency. On the other hand, the Tiger T310 has only 4 cores, which may limit its capabilities for multitasking and heavy usage.
Both processors utilize the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, ensuring compatibility with a wide range of software. However, the Kirin 9000 5G surpasses the Tiger T310 in lithography, with a smaller 5 nm process compared to the Tiger T310's 12 nm. This means that the Kirin 9000 5G is more power-efficient and produces less heat, contributing to better overall performance and battery life.
The Kirin 9000 5G also boasts a significantly higher number of transistors at 15300 million, which implies a more complex and powerful processor design. In comparison, the Tiger T310's transistor count is not specified, indicating a less advanced design.
Furthermore, the Kirin 9000 5G includes advanced neural processing capabilities with its Ascend Lite and Ascend Tiny technologies, utilizing the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. This enables enhanced AI functionality and improved overall performance.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G clearly outperforms the Unisoc Tiger T310 in terms of core count, architecture, lithography, transistor count, and neural processing capabilities. It offers a more advanced and powerful processing experience, making it the superior choice for high-performance tasks and demanding applications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G, it features a more advanced architecture that includes 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This allows for a higher level of multitasking and overall better performance. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has a less powerful architecture with 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 core and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While still capable, it may struggle with demanding tasks.
In terms of the number of cores, the Kirin 9000 5G comes out on top with 8 cores, providing better performance and efficiency. On the other hand, the Tiger T310 has only 4 cores, which may limit its capabilities for multitasking and heavy usage.
Both processors utilize the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, ensuring compatibility with a wide range of software. However, the Kirin 9000 5G surpasses the Tiger T310 in lithography, with a smaller 5 nm process compared to the Tiger T310's 12 nm. This means that the Kirin 9000 5G is more power-efficient and produces less heat, contributing to better overall performance and battery life.
The Kirin 9000 5G also boasts a significantly higher number of transistors at 15300 million, which implies a more complex and powerful processor design. In comparison, the Tiger T310's transistor count is not specified, indicating a less advanced design.
Furthermore, the Kirin 9000 5G includes advanced neural processing capabilities with its Ascend Lite and Ascend Tiny technologies, utilizing the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. This enables enhanced AI functionality and improved overall performance.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G clearly outperforms the Unisoc Tiger T310 in terms of core count, architecture, lithography, transistor count, and neural processing capabilities. It offers a more advanced and powerful processing experience, making it the superior choice for high-performance tasks and demanding applications.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 3.13 GHz – Cortex-A77 3x 2.54 GHz – Cortex-A77 4x 2.05 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
1x 2 GHz – Cortex-A75 3x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 5 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 15300 million | |
TDP | 6 Watt | |
Neural Processing | Ascend Lite (2x) + Ascend Tiny (1x), HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0 |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 16 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2750 MHz | 1333 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 3.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G78 MP24 | Imagination PowerVR GE8300 |
GPU Architecture | Mali Valhall | PowerVR Rogue |
GPU frequency | 760 MHz | 660 MHz |
Execution units | 24 | 2 |
Shaders | 384 | 32 |
DirectX | 12 | 10 |
OpenCL API | 2.1 | 3.0 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 3840x2160 | 1600x720 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 16MP + 1x 8MP | |
Max Video Capture | 4K@60fps | 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 | 4.6 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 2.5 Gbps | 0.1 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 6 (802.11ax) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 5.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS NavIC |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 October | 2019 April |
Partnumber | T310 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Low-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 9400 vs Apple A10X Fusion
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 690 vs MediaTek Dimensity 700
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 vs Unisoc SC7731E
4
Apple A18 Pro vs MediaTek Helio P90
5
Google Tensor G4 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1080
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 vs Samsung Exynos 2500
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8s Gen 4 vs Samsung Exynos 980
9
MediaTek Dimensity 1100 vs MediaTek Helio G25
10
HiSilicon Kirin 710A vs Samsung Exynos 1580