HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs HiSilicon Kirin 955
The HiSilicon Kirin 935 and HiSilicon Kirin 955 are both processors used in mobile devices like smartphones and tablets. While they have some similarities, they also have several key differences in terms of their specifications.
One major difference between the two processors is their CPU architecture. The HiSilicon Kirin 935 has a CPU architecture comprised of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a CPU architecture composed of 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This means that the Kirin 955 has faster and more powerful CPU cores in comparison to the Kirin 935.
Another significant difference between the two processors is their lithography. The HiSilicon Kirin 935 has a lithography of 28 nm, while the Kirin 955 has a lithography of 16 nm. A smaller lithography generally translates to improved power efficiency and performance.
The number of transistors is also different between the two processors. The Kirin 935 has 1000 million transistors, whereas the Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors. This suggests that the Kirin 955 has a higher transistor count, which can lead to better overall performance and functionality.
One final difference to note is the thermal design power (TDP) of the processors. The Kirin 935 has a TDP of 7 Watts, while the Kirin 955 has a lower TDP of 5 Watts. A lower TDP typically indicates better power efficiency, which can contribute to longer battery life and cooler operation.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 offers several improvements over the Kirin 935. With a more powerful CPU architecture, smaller lithography, higher transistor count, and lower TDP, the Kirin 955 generally provides better performance and power efficiency.
One major difference between the two processors is their CPU architecture. The HiSilicon Kirin 935 has a CPU architecture comprised of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a CPU architecture composed of 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This means that the Kirin 955 has faster and more powerful CPU cores in comparison to the Kirin 935.
Another significant difference between the two processors is their lithography. The HiSilicon Kirin 935 has a lithography of 28 nm, while the Kirin 955 has a lithography of 16 nm. A smaller lithography generally translates to improved power efficiency and performance.
The number of transistors is also different between the two processors. The Kirin 935 has 1000 million transistors, whereas the Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors. This suggests that the Kirin 955 has a higher transistor count, which can lead to better overall performance and functionality.
One final difference to note is the thermal design power (TDP) of the processors. The Kirin 935 has a TDP of 7 Watts, while the Kirin 955 has a lower TDP of 5 Watts. A lower TDP typically indicates better power efficiency, which can contribute to longer battery life and cooler operation.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 offers several improvements over the Kirin 935. With a more powerful CPU architecture, smaller lithography, higher transistor count, and lower TDP, the Kirin 955 generally provides better performance and power efficiency.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 16 nm |
Number of transistors | 1000 million | 2000 million |
TDP | 7 Watt | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4 |
Memory frequency | 800 MHz | 1333 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-T880 MP4 |
GPU Architecture | Mali Midgard | Mali Midgard |
GPU frequency | 680 MHz | 900 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 4 |
Shaders | 64 | 64 |
DirectX | 11 | 11.2 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2560x1600 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.05 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 | 2016 April |
Partnumber | Hi3635 | Hi3655 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Flagship |
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 1580 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 4
2
HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs HiSilicon Kirin 955
3
Samsung Exynos 8890 vs MediaTek Helio G25
4
HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs Unisoc Tiger T710
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 782G vs MediaTek Dimensity 1080
6
Samsung Exynos 990 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 710
7
MediaTek Dimensity 900 vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G vs MediaTek Dimensity 8050
9
MediaTek Dimensity 7030 vs Google Tensor G2
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 vs Samsung Exynos 850