HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T616
When comparing the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G and Unisoc Tiger T616 processors, several key differences stand out.
Firstly, in terms of architecture and CPU cores, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G features a more powerful setup. It utilizes a combination of Cortex-A77 and Cortex-A55 cores, with a 1x 3.13 GHz, 3x 2.54 GHz, and 4x 2.05 GHz configuration. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 consists of Cortex-A75 and Cortex-A55 cores, with a 2x 2.0 GHz and 6x 1.8 GHz configuration.
Both processors have 8 cores and operate on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, offering efficient and advanced performance. However, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G has a clear advantage with its faster clock speeds, indicating potentially better overall performance.
Another significant difference lies in the lithography and power consumption. The HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G adopts a newer 5 nm lithography, which allows for greater transistor density and potentially improved energy efficiency. It has around 15300 million transistors and a lower TDP of 6 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 operates on a 12 nm lithography, which is less advanced compared to the Kirin 9000E 5G. Its TDP stands at 10 Watts, indicating a higher power consumption.
Furthermore, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G boasts additional features in the form of its Neural Processing capabilities. It utilizes Ascend Lite + Ascend Tiny and the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0, which enhances its ability to handle AI-related tasks.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G surpasses the Unisoc Tiger T616 in several aspects. It has a more potent CPU configuration, a more advanced 5 nm lithography, lower power consumption, and additional Neural Processing capabilities. These differences suggest that the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G might deliver better overall performance and efficiency.
Firstly, in terms of architecture and CPU cores, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G features a more powerful setup. It utilizes a combination of Cortex-A77 and Cortex-A55 cores, with a 1x 3.13 GHz, 3x 2.54 GHz, and 4x 2.05 GHz configuration. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 consists of Cortex-A75 and Cortex-A55 cores, with a 2x 2.0 GHz and 6x 1.8 GHz configuration.
Both processors have 8 cores and operate on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, offering efficient and advanced performance. However, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G has a clear advantage with its faster clock speeds, indicating potentially better overall performance.
Another significant difference lies in the lithography and power consumption. The HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G adopts a newer 5 nm lithography, which allows for greater transistor density and potentially improved energy efficiency. It has around 15300 million transistors and a lower TDP of 6 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 operates on a 12 nm lithography, which is less advanced compared to the Kirin 9000E 5G. Its TDP stands at 10 Watts, indicating a higher power consumption.
Furthermore, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G boasts additional features in the form of its Neural Processing capabilities. It utilizes Ascend Lite + Ascend Tiny and the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0, which enhances its ability to handle AI-related tasks.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G surpasses the Unisoc Tiger T616 in several aspects. It has a more potent CPU configuration, a more advanced 5 nm lithography, lower power consumption, and additional Neural Processing capabilities. These differences suggest that the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G might deliver better overall performance and efficiency.
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 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 + Ascend Tiny, 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 | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 4x16 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 3.1 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G78 MP22 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Valhall | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 760 MHz | 750 MHz |
Execution units | 22 | 1 |
Shaders | 352 | 16 |
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 64MP, 2x 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 | 2021 |
Partnumber | T616 | |
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
Samsung Exynos 9825 vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G
2
Unisoc Tiger T310 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
3
Samsung Exynos 1380 vs Apple A12 Bionic
4
HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6100 Plus
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 2 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
6
Samsung Exynos 7870 vs Samsung Exynos 9609
7
Samsung Exynos 7904 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1100
8
HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1
9
Apple A10 Fusion vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1
10
Samsung Exynos 2200 vs MediaTek Dimensity 930