HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs Unisoc Tiger T612
When comparing the HiSilicon Kirin 930 and the Unisoc Tiger T612 processors, several specifications come into play.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 features an architecture of 4x 2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, totaling 8 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T612 includes 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, also totaling 8 cores. While both processors have the same number of cores, they differ in their respective architecture designs.
As for the instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 utilizes ARMv8-A, while the Unisoc Tiger T612 employs ARMv8.2-A. This indicates that the Tiger T612 has a more updated instruction set compared to the Kirin 930.
Regarding lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 adopts a 28 nm process, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T612 utilizes a more advanced 12 nm process. This indicates that the T612 might be more power-efficient and potentially offer better performance due to the smaller transistor size.
In terms of the number of transistors, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 has approximately 1000 million transistors. Unfortunately, the information about the number of transistors for the Unisoc Tiger T612 was not provided.
Lastly, the thermal design power (TDP), which indicates the maximum amount of power that a processor dissipates, is 5 Watts for the HiSilicon Kirin 930 and 10 Watts for the Unisoc Tiger T612. A higher TDP generally suggests that a processor may consume more power and generate more heat.
Overall, the Unisoc Tiger T612 seems to have a more advanced architecture with newer instruction sets and a smaller lithography, potentially leading to better power efficiency and performance compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 930. However, without information on the number of transistors for the Tiger T612, it is challenging to make a conclusive comparison based on just these specifications.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 features an architecture of 4x 2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, totaling 8 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T612 includes 2x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, also totaling 8 cores. While both processors have the same number of cores, they differ in their respective architecture designs.
As for the instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 utilizes ARMv8-A, while the Unisoc Tiger T612 employs ARMv8.2-A. This indicates that the Tiger T612 has a more updated instruction set compared to the Kirin 930.
Regarding lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 adopts a 28 nm process, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T612 utilizes a more advanced 12 nm process. This indicates that the T612 might be more power-efficient and potentially offer better performance due to the smaller transistor size.
In terms of the number of transistors, the HiSilicon Kirin 930 has approximately 1000 million transistors. Unfortunately, the information about the number of transistors for the Unisoc Tiger T612 was not provided.
Lastly, the thermal design power (TDP), which indicates the maximum amount of power that a processor dissipates, is 5 Watts for the HiSilicon Kirin 930 and 10 Watts for the Unisoc Tiger T612. A higher TDP generally suggests that a processor may consume more power and generate more heat.
Overall, the Unisoc Tiger T612 seems to have a more advanced architecture with newer instruction sets and a smaller lithography, potentially leading to better power efficiency and performance compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 930. However, without information on the number of transistors for the Tiger T612, it is challenging to make a conclusive comparison based on just these specifications.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 1000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 10 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 800 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.2 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 600 MHz | 650 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 1 |
Shaders | 64 | 16 |
DirectX | 11 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2560x1600 | 2400x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP | 1x 50MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@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 | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.1 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2015 Quarter 2 | 2022 January |
Partnumber | Hi3630 | T612 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus
2
MediaTek Dimensity 800 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G vs Apple A15 Bionic
4
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs Samsung Exynos 2200
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 678 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 680
6
MediaTek Dimensity 1050 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Plus Gen 2
7
Apple A11 Bionic vs Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G
8
Unisoc SC9832E vs Apple A17 Pro
9
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
10
MediaTek Dimensity 1200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730