HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs MediaTek Dimensity 920
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and the MediaTek Dimensity 920 are two processors with distinct specifications. Let's compare them and analyze their features.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 950 features a combination of 4 Cortex-A72 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. On the other hand, the Dimensity 920 boasts 2 Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. Both processors have 8 cores in total, allowing for efficient multitasking and performance.
When it comes to the instruction set, the Kirin 950 supports ARMv8-A, while the Dimensity 920 supports ARMv8.2-A. This indicates that the Dimensity 920 has a more advanced instruction set, potentially leading to enhanced performance and efficiency.
In terms of lithography, the Kirin 950 is built on a 16 nm process, while the Dimensity 920 utilizes a smaller 6 nm process. A smaller lithography generally allows for improved energy efficiency and better overall performance due to tighter component integration.
The Kirin 950 has 2000 million transistors, whereas the Dimensity 920 does not specify this information. However, a higher transistor count generally indicates a more complex and powerful processor.
In terms of power consumption, the Kirin 950 has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watts, while the Dimensity 920 has a TDP of 10 Watts. This suggests that the Kirin 950 is more power-efficient, potentially leading to longer battery life in devices that use this processor.
Additionally, the Dimensity 920 also includes a Neural Processing Unit (NPU) which can accelerate AI-related tasks. Unfortunately, the Kirin 950 does not specify if it has an NPU.
In conclusion, while both the HiSilicon Kirin 950 and the MediaTek Dimensity 920 have their own unique set of specifications, the Dimensity 920 seems to have a slight advantage in terms of architecture, lithography, and potentially AI capabilities. However, further performance comparisons and real-world benchmarks would be necessary to determine which processor offers superior overall performance.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the Kirin 950 features a combination of 4 Cortex-A72 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. On the other hand, the Dimensity 920 boasts 2 Cortex-A78 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and 6 Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. Both processors have 8 cores in total, allowing for efficient multitasking and performance.
When it comes to the instruction set, the Kirin 950 supports ARMv8-A, while the Dimensity 920 supports ARMv8.2-A. This indicates that the Dimensity 920 has a more advanced instruction set, potentially leading to enhanced performance and efficiency.
In terms of lithography, the Kirin 950 is built on a 16 nm process, while the Dimensity 920 utilizes a smaller 6 nm process. A smaller lithography generally allows for improved energy efficiency and better overall performance due to tighter component integration.
The Kirin 950 has 2000 million transistors, whereas the Dimensity 920 does not specify this information. However, a higher transistor count generally indicates a more complex and powerful processor.
In terms of power consumption, the Kirin 950 has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watts, while the Dimensity 920 has a TDP of 10 Watts. This suggests that the Kirin 950 is more power-efficient, potentially leading to longer battery life in devices that use this processor.
Additionally, the Dimensity 920 also includes a Neural Processing Unit (NPU) which can accelerate AI-related tasks. Unfortunately, the Kirin 950 does not specify if it has an NPU.
In conclusion, while both the HiSilicon Kirin 950 and the MediaTek Dimensity 920 have their own unique set of specifications, the Dimensity 920 seems to have a slight advantage in terms of architecture, lithography, and potentially AI capabilities. However, further performance comparisons and real-world benchmarks would be necessary to determine which processor offers superior overall performance.
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 |
2x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A78 6x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 6 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 10 Watt |
Neural Processing | NPU |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 16 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR5 |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 3200 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 3.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G68 MP4 |
GPU Architecture | Mali Midgard | Mali Valhall |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 950 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 4 |
Shaders | 64 | 96 |
DirectX | 11.2 | 12 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 2.0 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 2520x1080@120Hz | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 108MP, 2x 20MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | 4K@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP9 |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | 2.77 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 1.2 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 6 (802.11ax) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 5.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS NavIC QZSS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2015 November | 2021 Quarter 3 |
Partnumber | Hi3650 | MT6877T |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Mid-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 1480 vs MediaTek Helio P70
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 685 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6300
3
Google Tensor G4 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
4
MediaTek Helio P90 vs Samsung Exynos 9820
5
MediaTek Helio G92 Max vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
6
Unisoc Tiger T310 vs MediaTek Dimensity 800U
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1
8
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs Google Tensor G3
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 821
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 439 vs Apple A17 Pro