HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Kirin 985 5G are two processors developed by HiSilicon Technologies for use in mobile devices. These processors offer different specifications and features, making them suitable for various applications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it features a total of eight CPU cores, with an architecture of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53. The processor is based on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 16 nm. With 2000 million transistors, it provides a high level of performance, while maintaining a low power consumption of only 5 watts.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G comes with an architecture of 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55. Like the Kirin 950, it also has eight CPU cores, but it boasts a more advanced ARMv8.2-A instruction set. With a 7 nm lithography, this processor offers improved power efficiency and higher transistor density. The Kirin 985 5G has a slightly higher TDP of 6 watts, making it slightly more power-hungry compared to the Kirin 950.
Additionally, the Kirin 985 5G provides neural processing capabilities with its Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny, both based on the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture. This feature enables AI-related tasks to be performed more efficiently, enhancing the overall performance and user experience.
In conclusion, while both processors offer high-performance capabilities, the Kirin 985 5G excels in terms of architecture, lithography, and neural processing. It provides a more advanced instruction set and improved power efficiency, making it a suitable choice for users seeking cutting-edge technology. However, the Kirin 950 still proves to be a reliable and efficient processor, particularly for those who prioritize power consumption.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it features a total of eight CPU cores, with an architecture of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53. The processor is based on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 16 nm. With 2000 million transistors, it provides a high level of performance, while maintaining a low power consumption of only 5 watts.
On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 985 5G comes with an architecture of 1x 2.58 GHz Cortex-A76, 3x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A76, and 4x 1.84 GHz Cortex-A55. Like the Kirin 950, it also has eight CPU cores, but it boasts a more advanced ARMv8.2-A instruction set. With a 7 nm lithography, this processor offers improved power efficiency and higher transistor density. The Kirin 985 5G has a slightly higher TDP of 6 watts, making it slightly more power-hungry compared to the Kirin 950.
Additionally, the Kirin 985 5G provides neural processing capabilities with its Ascend D110 Lite and Ascend D100 Tiny, both based on the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture. This feature enables AI-related tasks to be performed more efficiently, enhancing the overall performance and user experience.
In conclusion, while both processors offer high-performance capabilities, the Kirin 985 5G excels in terms of architecture, lithography, and neural processing. It provides a more advanced instruction set and improved power efficiency, making it a suitable choice for users seeking cutting-edge technology. However, the Kirin 950 still proves to be a reliable and efficient processor, particularly for those who prioritize power consumption.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 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 | 16 nm | 7 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend D110 Lite + Ascend D100 Tiny, HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 12 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 2133 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 3.0 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G77 MP8 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 700 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 8 |
Shaders | 64 | 128 |
DirectX | 11.2 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.1 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 3120x1440 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 48MP, 2x 20MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | 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 November | 2020 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi3650 | Hi6290 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Helio A25 vs Samsung Exynos 2100
2
Google Tensor G3 vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F
3
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Google Tensor G2
4
MediaTek Helio G35 vs Samsung Exynos 8895
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus
6
MediaTek Dimensity 1300 vs MediaTek Helio G95
7
Samsung Exynos 7904 vs Apple A11 Bionic
8
MediaTek Dimensity 1000 vs Samsung Exynos 2200
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1
10
HiSilicon Kirin 970 vs MediaTek Helio G36