HiSilicon Kirin 935 vs Unisoc Tiger T610
When comparing the specifications of the HiSilicon Kirin 935 and the Unisoc Tiger T610 processors, several key differences arise.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 features a total of eight cores split into two groups. The first group consists of four Cortex-A53 cores, running at a speed of 2.2 GHz, while the second group also includes four Cortex-A53 cores but with a slightly lower speed of 1.5 GHz. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T610 incorporates eight cores as well, but with a different architecture. It includes two Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz, accompanied by six Cortex-A55 cores also running at 1.8 GHz.
Looking at the instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 adopts the ARMv8-A instruction set. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T610 incorporates the more advanced ARMv8.2-A instruction set.
In terms of lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 utilizes a 28 nm manufacturing process, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T610 employs a more advanced 12 nm lithography. This indicates that the Unisoc Tiger T610 is fabricated using a more modern and efficient technology, potentially resulting in better power efficiency and performance.
Considering the number of transistors, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 features 1000 million transistors. Unfortunately, the number of transistors for the Unisoc Tiger T610 is not provided.
Lastly, in terms of thermal design power (TDP), the HiSilicon Kirin 935 has a TDP of 7 Watts, while the Unisoc Tiger T610 has a slightly higher TDP of 10 Watts.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 and the Unisoc Tiger T610 processors differ in several aspects. The Unisoc Tiger T610 boasts a more advanced ARM instruction set, a smaller lithography, and a higher TDP compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 935. Without further information on additional specifications such as transistor count, it is difficult to make a comprehensive comparison beyond these factors.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 features a total of eight cores split into two groups. The first group consists of four Cortex-A53 cores, running at a speed of 2.2 GHz, while the second group also includes four Cortex-A53 cores but with a slightly lower speed of 1.5 GHz. On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T610 incorporates eight cores as well, but with a different architecture. It includes two Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz, accompanied by six Cortex-A55 cores also running at 1.8 GHz.
Looking at the instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 adopts the ARMv8-A instruction set. In contrast, the Unisoc Tiger T610 incorporates the more advanced ARMv8.2-A instruction set.
In terms of lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 utilizes a 28 nm manufacturing process, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T610 employs a more advanced 12 nm lithography. This indicates that the Unisoc Tiger T610 is fabricated using a more modern and efficient technology, potentially resulting in better power efficiency and performance.
Considering the number of transistors, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 features 1000 million transistors. Unfortunately, the number of transistors for the Unisoc Tiger T610 is not provided.
Lastly, in terms of thermal design power (TDP), the HiSilicon Kirin 935 has a TDP of 7 Watts, while the Unisoc Tiger T610 has a slightly higher TDP of 10 Watts.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 935 and the Unisoc Tiger T610 processors differ in several aspects. The Unisoc Tiger T610 boasts a more advanced ARM instruction set, a smaller lithography, and a higher TDP compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 935. Without further information on additional specifications such as transistor count, it is difficult to make a comprehensive comparison beyond these factors.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.2 GHz – Cortex-A53 4x 1.5 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 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 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR3 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 800 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T628 MP4 | Mali-G52 MP2 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 680 MHz | 614.4 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 2 |
Shaders | 64 | 32 |
DirectX | 11 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2560x1600 | 2400x1080 |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP | 1x 32MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
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 | 2019 June |
Partnumber | Hi3635 | T610 |
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
MediaTek Helio P65 vs Google Tensor G1
2
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs MediaTek Helio G95
3
Samsung Exynos 8895 vs MediaTek Helio G96
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 690 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 632 vs MediaTek Dimensity 7050
6
MediaTek Dimensity 8000 vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 4G
7
MediaTek Dimensity 820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus
8
Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G vs Unisoc SC9832E
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
10
HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs Apple A17 Pro