HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs HiSilicon Kirin 970
The HiSilicon Kirin 935 and the HiSilicon Kirin 970 are two processors produced by HiSilicon, a semiconductor company owned by Huawei Technologies. These processors are commonly used in smartphones and other mobile devices. Here, we will compare the specifications of both processors.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it features an architecture that consists of 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 2.2 GHz and another 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.5 GHz. With a total of 8 cores, this processor provides a good balance between performance and power efficiency. The instruction set used is ARMv8-A, which is the latest version of the ARM architecture. It is manufactured using a 28 nm process and contains approximately 1000 million transistors. The power consumption, or thermal design power (TDP), of this processor is 7 watts.
Moving on to the HiSilicon Kirin 970, it showcases an improved architecture compared to its predecessor. It utilizes 4 Cortex-A73 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. This architecture offers better performance with higher clock speeds on the A73 cores. Like the Kirin 935, it also comes with 8 cores and uses the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 970 has a smaller lithography process of 10 nm, allowing for improved power efficiency and reduced heat generation. It contains a significantly higher number of transistors, around 5500 million, indicating enhanced processing capabilities. The TDP of the Kirin 970 is slightly higher than its predecessor at 9 watts. Additionally, this processor comes equipped with the HiSilicon NPU, which stands for Neural Processing Unit. This dedicated AI chip enhances the processor's capability to handle artificial intelligence tasks efficiently.
In summary, the Kirin 970 boasts better performance and power efficiency compared to the Kirin 935. It utilizes a more advanced architecture, smaller lithography, and a larger number of transistors. Additionally, the Kirin 970 includes the HiSilicon NPU, providing better AI processing capabilities. Overall, the Kirin 970 is a significant upgrade in terms of specifications and is likely to deliver improved performance in real-world usage scenarios.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it features an architecture that consists of 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 2.2 GHz and another 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.5 GHz. With a total of 8 cores, this processor provides a good balance between performance and power efficiency. The instruction set used is ARMv8-A, which is the latest version of the ARM architecture. It is manufactured using a 28 nm process and contains approximately 1000 million transistors. The power consumption, or thermal design power (TDP), of this processor is 7 watts.
Moving on to the HiSilicon Kirin 970, it showcases an improved architecture compared to its predecessor. It utilizes 4 Cortex-A73 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. This architecture offers better performance with higher clock speeds on the A73 cores. Like the Kirin 935, it also comes with 8 cores and uses the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, the Kirin 970 has a smaller lithography process of 10 nm, allowing for improved power efficiency and reduced heat generation. It contains a significantly higher number of transistors, around 5500 million, indicating enhanced processing capabilities. The TDP of the Kirin 970 is slightly higher than its predecessor at 9 watts. Additionally, this processor comes equipped with the HiSilicon NPU, which stands for Neural Processing Unit. This dedicated AI chip enhances the processor's capability to handle artificial intelligence tasks efficiently.
In summary, the Kirin 970 boasts better performance and power efficiency compared to the Kirin 935. It utilizes a more advanced architecture, smaller lithography, and a larger number of transistors. Additionally, the Kirin 970 includes the HiSilicon NPU, providing better AI processing capabilities. Overall, the Kirin 970 is a significant upgrade in terms of specifications and is likely to deliver improved performance in real-world usage scenarios.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 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 | 7 Watt | 9 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 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 | 680 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 | Hi3635 | 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
Samsung Exynos 8895 vs MediaTek Helio G90
2
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs Unisoc SC9863A
3
Unisoc Tanggula T760 5G vs MediaTek Dimensity 800
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 670
5
MediaTek Dimensity 820 vs Samsung Exynos 2200
6
HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G vs Unisoc Tiger T610
7
Apple A17 Pro vs HiSilicon Kirin 935
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662
9
HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8200
10
Apple A10 Fusion vs HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G