HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G vs Unisoc SC7731E
The HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G and Unisoc SC7731E are two processors with distinct specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G, it offers impressive CPU capabilities. It features a powerful architecture consisting of 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. With eight cores in total, this processor can handle demanding tasks efficiently. Additionally, it utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, ensuring compatibility with modern software. The Kirin 9000E 5G is built using a 5 nm lithography process, which results in improved power efficiency and performance. It contains a staggering 15300 million transistors, indicating its advanced design. With a TDP of 6 Watts, it offers a balance between power consumption and high performance. Furthermore, it incorporates neural processing capabilities with the Ascend Lite + Ascend Tiny and HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0, enhancing its artificial intelligence capabilities.
In contrast, the Unisoc SC7731E has more modest specifications. Its architecture consists of 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 cores, providing a lower level of performance compared to the Kirin 9000E 5G. With four cores in total, it has fewer resources for multitasking and demanding applications. The SC7731E utilizes ARMv7-A instruction set, which might limit its compatibility with certain modern software. It is built on a 28 nm lithography process, which is larger compared to the Kirin 9000E 5G, potentially resulting in higher power consumption and reduced performance. The TDP of the SC7731E is 7 Watts, slightly more than the Kirin 9000E 5G.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G stands out with its powerful architecture, advanced lithography, and neural processing capabilities. It offers greater performance and power efficiency compared to the Unisoc SC7731E. On the other hand, the SC7731E may be suitable for simpler tasks that do not require intensive processing power. It is essential to consider these specifications when choosing a processor, depending on individual requirements and usage scenarios.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G, it offers impressive CPU capabilities. It features a powerful architecture consisting of 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. With eight cores in total, this processor can handle demanding tasks efficiently. Additionally, it utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, ensuring compatibility with modern software. The Kirin 9000E 5G is built using a 5 nm lithography process, which results in improved power efficiency and performance. It contains a staggering 15300 million transistors, indicating its advanced design. With a TDP of 6 Watts, it offers a balance between power consumption and high performance. Furthermore, it incorporates neural processing capabilities with the Ascend Lite + Ascend Tiny and HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0, enhancing its artificial intelligence capabilities.
In contrast, the Unisoc SC7731E has more modest specifications. Its architecture consists of 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 cores, providing a lower level of performance compared to the Kirin 9000E 5G. With four cores in total, it has fewer resources for multitasking and demanding applications. The SC7731E utilizes ARMv7-A instruction set, which might limit its compatibility with certain modern software. It is built on a 28 nm lithography process, which is larger compared to the Kirin 9000E 5G, potentially resulting in higher power consumption and reduced performance. The TDP of the SC7731E is 7 Watts, slightly more than the Kirin 9000E 5G.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G stands out with its powerful architecture, advanced lithography, and neural processing capabilities. It offers greater performance and power efficiency compared to the Unisoc SC7731E. On the other hand, the SC7731E may be suitable for simpler tasks that do not require intensive processing power. It is essential to consider these specifications when choosing a processor, depending on individual requirements and usage scenarios.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 1x 3.13 GHz – Cortex-A77 3x 2.54 GHz – Cortex-A77 4x 2.05 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
4x 1.3 GHz – Cortex-A7 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8.2-A | ARMv7-A |
Lithography | 5 nm | 28 nm |
Number of transistors | 15300 million | |
TDP | 6 Watt | 7 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend Lite + Ascend Tiny, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0 |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 16 GB | up to 1 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR5 | LPDDR3 |
Memory frequency | 2750 MHz | 533 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 3.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G78 MP22 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Midgard |
GPU frequency | 760 MHz | 600 MHz |
Execution units | 22 | 1 |
Shaders | 352 | 4 |
DirectX | 12 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 2.1 | 1.2 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | ES 3.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.2 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 3840x2160 | 1440x720 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 8MP | |
Max Video Capture | 4K@60fps | HD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 4.6 Gbps | |
Peak Upload Speed | 2.5 Gbps | |
Wi-Fi | 6 (802.11ax) | 4 (802.11n) |
Bluetooth | 5.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS NavIC |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2020 October | 2018 Quarter 2 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
2
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888
3
MediaTek Helio P35 vs Unisoc Tiger T606
4
Samsung Exynos 990 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
5
Samsung Exynos 7880 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
6
Google Tensor G2 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1
7
MediaTek Dimensity 8020 vs MediaTek Dimensity 700
8
MediaTek Helio P70 vs Unisoc Tiger T710
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G vs Samsung Exynos 7904
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 678 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G