HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 935 and HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G are both processors manufactured by HiSilicon, a subsidiary of Huawei. These processors are commonly used in smartphones and other mobile devices. While they have some similarities, there are also several key differences in their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it is built on a 28 nm lithography, meaning it uses a semiconductor manufacturing process that is slightly older compared to the Kirin 985 5G. The Kirin 935 has a total of 8 cores, with an architecture that comprises of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This processor has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 7 Watts and an ARMv8-A instruction set. Additionally, the Kirin 935 has 1000 million transistors.
On the other hand, the Kirin 985 5G is manufactured on a more advanced 7 nm lithography, which allows for better power efficiency and improved performance. This processor also has 8 cores, featuring an architecture consisting of 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The TDP of the Kirin 985 5G is slightly lower than its predecessor at 6 Watts, which means it consumes less power. It also utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and includes the Neural Processing units Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny, using the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture.
Overall, the Kirin 985 5G offers several improvements over the Kirin 935. The most notable ones include a more advanced 7 nm lithography, better performance with the use of Cortex-A76 cores, and additional features such as a neural processing unit. These enhancements result in a processor that is more power efficient and capable of handling demanding tasks and applications.
In conclusion, while the HiSilicon Kirin 935 is a solid processor with 8 cores and a respectable performance, the Kirin 985 5G takes it to the next level with its more advanced manufacturing process, improved architecture, and additional features. For users seeking a high-performance processor with efficient power consumption, the Kirin 985 5G would be the more suitable choice.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it is built on a 28 nm lithography, meaning it uses a semiconductor manufacturing process that is slightly older compared to the Kirin 985 5G. The Kirin 935 has a total of 8 cores, with an architecture that comprises of 4x 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53 cores and 4x 1.5 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This processor has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 7 Watts and an ARMv8-A instruction set. Additionally, the Kirin 935 has 1000 million transistors.
On the other hand, the Kirin 985 5G is manufactured on a more advanced 7 nm lithography, which allows for better power efficiency and improved performance. This processor also has 8 cores, featuring an architecture consisting of 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76 core, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76 cores, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The TDP of the Kirin 985 5G is slightly lower than its predecessor at 6 Watts, which means it consumes less power. It also utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and includes the Neural Processing units Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny, using the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture.
Overall, the Kirin 985 5G offers several improvements over the Kirin 935. The most notable ones include a more advanced 7 nm lithography, better performance with the use of Cortex-A76 cores, and additional features such as a neural processing unit. These enhancements result in a processor that is more power efficient and capable of handling demanding tasks and applications.
In conclusion, while the HiSilicon Kirin 935 is a solid processor with 8 cores and a respectable performance, the Kirin 985 5G takes it to the next level with its more advanced manufacturing process, improved architecture, and additional features. For users seeking a high-performance processor with efficient power consumption, the Kirin 985 5G would be the more suitable choice.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 2.58 GHz – Cortex-A76 3x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A76 4x 1.84 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
Number of transistors | 1000 million | |
TDP | 7 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 GB | up to 12 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 800 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 3.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-G77 MP8 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 680 MHz | 700 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 8 |
Shaders | 64 | 128 |
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 20MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | 4K@30fp |
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 | 1.4 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.2 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 | 2020 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi3635 | Hi6290 |
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
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765
2
Unisoc Tiger T612 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 678
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 712 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6100 Plus
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G
5
MediaTek Helio G88 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 680
6
HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs Samsung Exynos 2100
7
MediaTek Dimensity 700 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G
8
MediaTek Helio P60 vs Apple A12 Bionic
9
MediaTek Dimensity 8100 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 675
10
Unisoc Tiger T700 vs Samsung Exynos 9820