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.
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 | Valhall | 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 |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
2
Apple A17 Pro vs Apple A13 Bionic
3
Unisoc SC9832E vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G Plus
4
Unisoc Tiger T606 vs HiSilicon Kirin 955
5
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1080
6
Samsung Exynos 2100 vs MediaTek Helio G90
7
Samsung Exynos 990 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 632
9
MediaTek Helio G37 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 685
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 695