HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T618
The HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T618 are two processors that cater to different market segments. Let's compare their specifications to see how they differ.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 9000 5G boasts a more advanced setup. It includes 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, along with 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. On the other hand, the Tiger T618 consists of 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While the Kirin 9000 5G uses a combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores, the Tiger T618 mainly focuses on power efficiency.
Both processors have 8 cores and support the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, there is a significant difference in their lithography. The Kirin 9000 5G utilizes a cutting-edge 5 nm lithography, which allows for better power efficiency and performance. The Tiger T618, on the other hand, employs a 12 nm lithography, which is a bit dated in comparison.
When it comes to neural processing capabilities, the Kirin 9000 5G stands out again. It features Ascend Lite (2x) and Ascend Tiny (1x) for neural processing, along with the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. The Tiger T618, on the other hand, employs an NPU or Neural Processing Unit. Although both processors offer neural processing capabilities, the Kirin 9000 5G's additional neural processing units and architecture make it more advanced in this regard.
Looking at power consumption, the Kirin 9000 5G has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 6 Watts, indicating its efficient power usage. The Tiger T618, however, has a higher TDP of 10 Watts. This suggests that the Kirin 9000 5G is more power-efficient than the Tiger T618.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T618 differ significantly in their specifications. The Kirin 9000 5G offers a more advanced architecture, superior lithography, additional neural processing units, and better power efficiency. The Tiger T618, on the other hand, focuses more on power efficiency but lacks some of the advanced features of the Kirin 9000 5G. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors depends on the specific requirements and priorities of the intended application.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 9000 5G boasts a more advanced setup. It includes 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, along with 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. On the other hand, the Tiger T618 consists of 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. While the Kirin 9000 5G uses a combination of high-performance and power-efficient cores, the Tiger T618 mainly focuses on power efficiency.
Both processors have 8 cores and support the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. However, there is a significant difference in their lithography. The Kirin 9000 5G utilizes a cutting-edge 5 nm lithography, which allows for better power efficiency and performance. The Tiger T618, on the other hand, employs a 12 nm lithography, which is a bit dated in comparison.
When it comes to neural processing capabilities, the Kirin 9000 5G stands out again. It features Ascend Lite (2x) and Ascend Tiny (1x) for neural processing, along with the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. The Tiger T618, on the other hand, employs an NPU or Neural Processing Unit. Although both processors offer neural processing capabilities, the Kirin 9000 5G's additional neural processing units and architecture make it more advanced in this regard.
Looking at power consumption, the Kirin 9000 5G has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 6 Watts, indicating its efficient power usage. The Tiger T618, however, has a higher TDP of 10 Watts. This suggests that the Kirin 9000 5G is more power-efficient than the Tiger T618.
In conclusion, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G and the Unisoc Tiger T618 differ significantly in their specifications. The Kirin 9000 5G offers a more advanced architecture, superior lithography, additional neural processing units, and better power efficiency. The Tiger T618, on the other hand, focuses more on power efficiency but lacks some of the advanced features of the Kirin 9000 5G. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors depends on the specific requirements and priorities of the intended application.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 3.13 GHz – Cortex-A77 3x 2.54 GHz – Cortex-A77 4x 2.05 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
2x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 2.0 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 | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 16 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 2750 MHz | 1866 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 | 850 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 64M | |
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 August |
Partnumber | T618 | |
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 6100 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G90
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 vs Unisoc SC7731E
3
MediaTek Helio P90 vs Samsung Exynos 2100
4
MediaTek Dimensity 1200 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
5
MediaTek Helio P60 vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
6
Google Tensor G2 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 695
7
Apple A12 Bionic vs MediaTek Helio G36
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G vs Samsung Exynos 1280
9
Samsung Exynos 7870 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1
10
Unisoc Tiger T612 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G