HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
The HiSilicon Kirin 935 and HiSilicon Kirin 980 are two processors with different specifications, and they are both developed by HiSilicon Technologies Co., Ltd., a subsidiary of Huawei.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it features an architecture consisting of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers a balance between power and efficiency. It utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set, which provides better performance and flexibility. The Kirin 935 is built on a 28 nm lithography process, which means it is not as advanced as the 980 in terms of manufacturing technology. It has around 1 billion transistors and a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 Watts, suggesting that it may consume more power compared to the Kirin 980 processor.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 boasts a more advanced architecture. It consists of 2x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, 2x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration offers a blend of high-performance and power-efficient cores, allowing for better multitasking and energy efficiency. The Kirin 980 is manufactured using a 7 nm lithography process, which is a significant improvement over the 28 nm process in the Kirin 935. This means the Kirin 980 is smaller, faster, and more power-efficient. Additionally, the Kirin 980 has a remarkable 6.9 billion transistors, indicating a significant increase in processing power. It also features the HiSilicon Dual NPU (Neural Processing Unit), which enhances artificial intelligence tasks.
In conclusion, while the HiSilicon Kirin 935 offers decent performance and efficiency with its 8 core architecture, it falls short compared to the more advanced HiSilicon Kirin 980. The Kirin 980's 8 core architecture, 7 nm lithography, and Dual NPU make it a more powerful and efficient choice for various applications, especially those that require AI processing capabilities.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it features an architecture consisting of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, this processor offers a balance between power and efficiency. It utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set, which provides better performance and flexibility. The Kirin 935 is built on a 28 nm lithography process, which means it is not as advanced as the 980 in terms of manufacturing technology. It has around 1 billion transistors and a thermal design power (TDP) of 7 Watts, suggesting that it may consume more power compared to the Kirin 980 processor.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 980 boasts a more advanced architecture. It consists of 2x 2.6 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, 2x 1.92 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This configuration offers a blend of high-performance and power-efficient cores, allowing for better multitasking and energy efficiency. The Kirin 980 is manufactured using a 7 nm lithography process, which is a significant improvement over the 28 nm process in the Kirin 935. This means the Kirin 980 is smaller, faster, and more power-efficient. Additionally, the Kirin 980 has a remarkable 6.9 billion transistors, indicating a significant increase in processing power. It also features the HiSilicon Dual NPU (Neural Processing Unit), which enhances artificial intelligence tasks.
In conclusion, while the HiSilicon Kirin 935 offers decent performance and efficiency with its 8 core architecture, it falls short compared to the more advanced HiSilicon Kirin 980. The Kirin 980's 8 core architecture, 7 nm lithography, and Dual NPU make it a more powerful and efficient choice for various applications, especially those that require AI processing capabilities.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 2.6 GHz – Cortex-A76 2x 1.92 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
Number of transistors | 1000 million | 6900 million |
TDP | 7 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | HiSilicon Dual NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 800 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-G76 MP10 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 680 MHz | 720 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 10 |
Shaders | 64 | 160 |
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 | 3120x1440 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP | 1x 48MP, 2x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | 4K@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
AV1 H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | 1.4 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 6 (802.11ax) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.0 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2015 Quarter 2 | 2018 Quarter 4 |
Partnumber | Hi3635 | |
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 2200 vs Samsung Exynos 7420
2
MediaTek Dimensity 6100 Plus vs MediaTek Dimensity 800
3
Unisoc Tiger T710 vs Samsung Exynos 7880
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G vs Samsung Exynos 990
5
Apple A16 Bionic vs MediaTek Helio G90T
6
MediaTek Dimensity 8200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820
7
Samsung Exynos 980 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 vs Samsung Exynos 1330
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G vs Samsung Exynos 7884B
10
Unisoc SC9863A vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000