HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs Unisoc Tiger T606
The HiSilicon Kirin 935 and Unisoc Tiger T606 are two processors with different specifications, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it is built on a 28 nm lithography process and consists of 8 CPU cores. The CPU architecture of the Kirin 935 consists of 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 2.2 GHz and another 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.5 GHz. It utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a transistor count of 1000 million. With a TDP of 7 Watts, the Kirin 935 aims to strike a balance between performance and power efficiency.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T606 comes with a 12 nm lithography process and also features 8 CPU cores. The CPU architecture of the T606 includes 2 Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 1.6 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores also clocked at 1.6 GHz. It uses the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a TDP of 10 Watts. With a smaller lithography process, the Tiger T606 promises improved power efficiency compared to the Kirin 935.
In terms of raw performance, the Kirin 935's higher clock speed on its Cortex-A53 cores might give it an advantage in tasks that rely heavily on single-thread performance. However, the Tiger T606's Cortex-A75 cores may offer a better performance in tasks that can make use of more powerful cores.
Considering power efficiency, the T606 has an edge with its 12 nm lithography process, which generally allows for lower power consumption compared to the larger 28 nm process used in the Kirin 935. This makes the T606 a more suitable option for mobile devices requiring efficient power consumption.
Overall, both processors have their own advantages. The Kirin 935 may excel in single-threaded tasks due to its higher clock speed, while the Tiger T606 may offer better power efficiency thanks to its smaller lithography process. The choice between the two would depend on the specific needs of the device and the tasks it will be performing.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 935, it is built on a 28 nm lithography process and consists of 8 CPU cores. The CPU architecture of the Kirin 935 consists of 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 2.2 GHz and another 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.5 GHz. It utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a transistor count of 1000 million. With a TDP of 7 Watts, the Kirin 935 aims to strike a balance between performance and power efficiency.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T606 comes with a 12 nm lithography process and also features 8 CPU cores. The CPU architecture of the T606 includes 2 Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 1.6 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores also clocked at 1.6 GHz. It uses the ARMv8.2-A instruction set and has a TDP of 10 Watts. With a smaller lithography process, the Tiger T606 promises improved power efficiency compared to the Kirin 935.
In terms of raw performance, the Kirin 935's higher clock speed on its Cortex-A53 cores might give it an advantage in tasks that rely heavily on single-thread performance. However, the Tiger T606's Cortex-A75 cores may offer a better performance in tasks that can make use of more powerful cores.
Considering power efficiency, the T606 has an edge with its 12 nm lithography process, which generally allows for lower power consumption compared to the larger 28 nm process used in the Kirin 935. This makes the T606 a more suitable option for mobile devices requiring efficient power consumption.
Overall, both processors have their own advantages. The Kirin 935 may excel in single-threaded tasks due to its higher clock speed, while the Tiger T606 may offer better power efficiency thanks to its smaller lithography process. The choice between the two would depend on the specific needs of the device and the tasks it will be performing.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 1.6 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.6 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 | 7 Watt | 10 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 8 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 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 680 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 | 1600x900@90Hz |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP | 1x 24MP, 16MP + 8MP |
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 | 2021 October |
Partnumber | Hi3635 | T606 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Mid-end | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Google Tensor G3 vs MediaTek Helio P35
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 870
3
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs Apple A12 Bionic
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 636
5
Samsung Exynos 990 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
6
Samsung Exynos 1280 vs MediaTek Helio G90T
7
Samsung Exynos 2200 vs MediaTek Dimensity 800
8
Samsung Exynos 7884B vs Samsung Exynos 8895
9
Apple A10 Fusion vs Samsung Exynos 7880
10
MediaTek Dimensity 6080 vs MediaTek Dimensity 810