HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs HiSilicon Kirin 970
The HiSilicon Kirin 930 and HiSilicon Kirin 970 are two processors with varying specifications. Let's compare their key features.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 930, it boasts a CPU architecture consisting of four Cortex-A53 cores running at 2 GHz and another four Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.5 GHz. With a total of eight cores, this processor offers a balanced performance for various tasks. It utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and is built on the 28 nm lithography process. The Kirin 930 incorporates 1000 million transistors and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts, indicating its energy efficiency.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 970 takes a step further in terms of performance. With an upgraded architecture, it features four Cortex-A73 cores operating at 2.4 GHz and four Cortex-A53 cores running at 1.8 GHz. Similar to the Kirin 930, it utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 970 is built on a more advanced 10 nm lithography process. This enables better power efficiency and improved performance. The processor houses a staggering 5500 million transistors, indicating a significant advancement in processing power. Additionally, the Kirin 970 incorporates a Neural Processing Unit (NPU), which enhances the device's AI capabilities, making it more efficient in tasks that involve machine learning and artificial intelligence.
In summary, while both processors share similarities such as the number of cores and instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 970 outperforms the Kirin 930 in several aspects. It features a higher clock speed, a more advanced lithography process, and significantly more transistors, indicating a substantial improvement in processing power. Moreover, the Kirin 970 stands out with the inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit, making it more efficient in handling AI-related tasks.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 930, it boasts a CPU architecture consisting of four Cortex-A53 cores running at 2 GHz and another four Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.5 GHz. With a total of eight cores, this processor offers a balanced performance for various tasks. It utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and is built on the 28 nm lithography process. The Kirin 930 incorporates 1000 million transistors and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts, indicating its energy efficiency.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 970 takes a step further in terms of performance. With an upgraded architecture, it features four Cortex-A73 cores operating at 2.4 GHz and four Cortex-A53 cores running at 1.8 GHz. Similar to the Kirin 930, it utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 970 is built on a more advanced 10 nm lithography process. This enables better power efficiency and improved performance. The processor houses a staggering 5500 million transistors, indicating a significant advancement in processing power. Additionally, the Kirin 970 incorporates a Neural Processing Unit (NPU), which enhances the device's AI capabilities, making it more efficient in tasks that involve machine learning and artificial intelligence.
In summary, while both processors share similarities such as the number of cores and instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 970 outperforms the Kirin 930 in several aspects. It features a higher clock speed, a more advanced lithography process, and significantly more transistors, indicating a substantial improvement in processing power. Moreover, the Kirin 970 stands out with the inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit, making it more efficient in handling AI-related tasks.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
Number of transistors | 1000 million | 5500 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 9 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4 |
Memory frequency | 800 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-G72 MP12 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 600 MHz | 750 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 12 |
Shaders | 64 | 192 |
DirectX | 11 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.0 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2560x1600 | 2340x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | 4K@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | 1.2 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.15 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2015 Quarter 2 | 2017 September |
Partnumber | Hi3630 | Hi3670 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Flagship |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Helio P60 vs Unisoc Tiger T710
2
MediaTek Dimensity 920 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus
3
MediaTek Dimensity 1050 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 695
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus vs MediaTek Helio G36
5
Samsung Exynos 990 vs Apple A15 Bionic
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 vs Unisoc Tiger T616
7
MediaTek Helio G90 vs Apple A10 Fusion
8
MediaTek Dimensity 1100 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730
9
Samsung Exynos 1330 vs MediaTek Helio P95
10
MediaTek Dimensity 9000 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855