HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T610
When comparing the specifications of the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T610 processors, there are several notable differences.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G features a more advanced architecture with a combination of Cortex-A77 and Cortex-A55 cores. It has 1x 3.13 GHz, 3x 2.54 GHz, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, along with 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T610 has 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. In terms of architecture, the Kirin 9000 5G seems to have a more powerful and diverse CPU setup.
Moving on to other specifications, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G is built on a more advanced 5 nm lithography process, compared to the Unisoc Tiger T610's 12 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally indicates better power efficiency and potentially higher performance. Additionally, the Kirin 9000 5G boasts a higher number of transistors with 15300 million, suggesting a more complex and powerful processor design.
In terms of instruction set, both processors use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, which ensures compatibility with modern software architecture. However, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G also includes Neural Processing with Ascend Lite and Ascend Tiny, as well as HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. This neural processing capability could boost AI-related tasks and applications.
Regarding power consumption, the Kirin 9000 5G has a lower TDP (Thermal Design Power) at 6 Watt, compared to the Tiger T610's 10 Watt TDP. This indicates that the Kirin 9000 5G may offer better power efficiency, potentially resulting in longer battery life for devices utilizing this processor.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G stands out with its more advanced architecture, smaller lithography, higher transistor count, additional neural processing capabilities, and lower TDP. These specifications suggest that the Kirin 9000 5G may deliver better overall performance, efficiency, and potential for AI-based functionalities compared to the Unisoc Tiger T610.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G features a more advanced architecture with a combination of Cortex-A77 and Cortex-A55 cores. It has 1x 3.13 GHz, 3x 2.54 GHz, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, along with 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T610 has 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. In terms of architecture, the Kirin 9000 5G seems to have a more powerful and diverse CPU setup.
Moving on to other specifications, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G is built on a more advanced 5 nm lithography process, compared to the Unisoc Tiger T610's 12 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally indicates better power efficiency and potentially higher performance. Additionally, the Kirin 9000 5G boasts a higher number of transistors with 15300 million, suggesting a more complex and powerful processor design.
In terms of instruction set, both processors use the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, which ensures compatibility with modern software architecture. However, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G also includes Neural Processing with Ascend Lite and Ascend Tiny, as well as HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. This neural processing capability could boost AI-related tasks and applications.
Regarding power consumption, the Kirin 9000 5G has a lower TDP (Thermal Design Power) at 6 Watt, compared to the Tiger T610's 10 Watt TDP. This indicates that the Kirin 9000 5G may offer better power efficiency, potentially resulting in longer battery life for devices utilizing this processor.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G stands out with its more advanced architecture, smaller lithography, higher transistor count, additional neural processing capabilities, and lower TDP. These specifications suggest that the Kirin 9000 5G may deliver better overall performance, efficiency, and potential for AI-based functionalities compared to the Unisoc Tiger T610.
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 |
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv8.2-A |
| Lithography | 5 nm | 12 nm |
| Number of transistors | 15300 million | |
| TDP | 6 Watt | 10 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 6 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory frequency | 2750 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 3.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-G78 MP24 | Mali-G52 MP2 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Valhall | Mali Bifrost |
| GPU frequency | 760 MHz | 614.4 MHz |
| Execution units | 24 | 2 |
| Shaders | 384 | 32 |
| DirectX | 12 | 11 |
| 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 | 3840x2160 | 2400x1080 |
| Max camera resolution | 1x 32MP | |
| Max Video Capture | 4K@60fps | FullHD@60fps |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
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 June |
| Partnumber | T610 | |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Flagship | Mid-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 7880 vs Apple A12 Bionic
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 4
3
MediaTek Dimensity 800 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G vs MediaTek Helio G35
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 vs Google Tensor G2
6
MediaTek Helio G70 vs Apple A17 Pro
7
Apple M1 (iPad) vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000L
8
Samsung Exynos 1480 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9400e
10
Samsung Exynos 980 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 5