HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs HiSilicon Kirin 955
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Kirin 955 are two processors that are used in smartphones and other mobile devices. While they have some similarities in terms of specifications, there are also a few key differences that set them apart.
Both processors have the same number of cores, with 8 cores in total. They also share the same instruction set, ARMv8-A, which is commonly used in modern processors. In addition, both processors are built using a 16 nm lithography process, which helps to improve performance and power efficiency.
One of the main differences between the two processors lies in their CPU cores and architecture. The Kirin 950 features 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, while the Kirin 955 has 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This means that the Kirin 955 has a slightly higher clock speed for its Cortex-A72 cores, which may result in improved performance in certain tasks.
Another notable difference is that the Kirin 950 has a transistor count of 2000 million, which is the same as the Kirin 955. This indicates that both processors have a similar level of silicon integration and complexity.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts. This means that they have similar power profiles and should provide similar battery life when used in mobile devices.
Overall, the Kirin 955 offers a slight advantage over the Kirin 950 in terms of CPU performance, thanks to its higher clock speed for the Cortex-A72 cores. However, for most users, the difference in performance may not be significant enough to warrant choosing one processor over the other. Both processors are capable of handling demanding tasks and providing a smooth user experience in daily usage.
Both processors have the same number of cores, with 8 cores in total. They also share the same instruction set, ARMv8-A, which is commonly used in modern processors. In addition, both processors are built using a 16 nm lithography process, which helps to improve performance and power efficiency.
One of the main differences between the two processors lies in their CPU cores and architecture. The Kirin 950 features 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, while the Kirin 955 has 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This means that the Kirin 955 has a slightly higher clock speed for its Cortex-A72 cores, which may result in improved performance in certain tasks.
Another notable difference is that the Kirin 950 has a transistor count of 2000 million, which is the same as the Kirin 955. This indicates that both processors have a similar level of silicon integration and complexity.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts. This means that they have similar power profiles and should provide similar battery life when used in mobile devices.
Overall, the Kirin 955 offers a slight advantage over the Kirin 950 in terms of CPU performance, thanks to its higher clock speed for the Cortex-A72 cores. However, for most users, the difference in performance may not be significant enough to warrant choosing one processor over the other. Both processors are capable of handling demanding tasks and providing a smooth user experience in daily usage.
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 16 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | 2000 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4 |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 1333 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-T880 MP4 |
GPU Architecture | Mali Midgard | Mali Midgard |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 900 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 4 |
Shaders | 64 | 64 |
DirectX | 11.2 | 11.2 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | FullHD@60fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.05 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 November | 2016 April |
Partnumber | Hi3650 | Hi3655 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Flagship |
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Dimensity 6400 vs Samsung Exynos 980
2
MediaTek Dimensity 1000L vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
3
MediaTek Dimensity 8350 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000S
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs MediaTek Helio A22
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G vs Apple A15 Bionic
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1 vs Apple A18
7
Apple A9 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
8
MediaTek Dimensity 6020 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8100
9
Google Tensor G4 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 660
10
Unisoc Tiger T310 vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G