HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs Unisoc SC7731E
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and the Unisoc SC7731E are two processors with differing specifications and capabilities. Let's compare their specifications to gain a better understanding of their differences.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, this processor boasts an architecture consisting of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, it is capable of handling more tasks simultaneously. The instruction set for this processor is ARMv8-A, which enables support for newer software and technologies. With a lithography of 16 nm, it is manufactured with a more advanced process, resulting in increased efficiency. The Kirin 950 also packs in 2000 million transistors, indicating its ability to process complex instructions. Furthermore, it has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watt, which means it consumes less power while delivering high performance.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC7731E processor has a different set of specifications. It features a 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 architecture, offering a lower clock speed compared to the Kirin 950. With 4 cores, it may not handle multitasking as efficiently as the Kirin 950, but it can still provide decent performance for basic tasks. The instruction set of this processor is ARMv7-A, not as advanced as the ARMv8-A found in the Kirin 950. Additionally, the lithography for the SC7731E is 28 nm, which is a less efficient manufacturing process compared to the 16 nm of the Kirin 950. The TDP for this processor is 7 Watt, meaning it consumes slightly more power than the Kirin 950.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 outperforms the Unisoc SC7731E in terms of processing power. It has a higher clock speed, more advanced architecture, lower lithography, and a lower TDP. Therefore, the Kirin 950 is capable of handling more complex tasks efficiently and consuming less power compared to the SC7731E. However, if the requirements are basic computing tasks, the Unisoc SC7731E can still deliver satisfactory performance. Ultimately, the choice between these processors would depend on the specific needs and budget of the user.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, this processor boasts an architecture consisting of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. With a total of 8 cores, it is capable of handling more tasks simultaneously. The instruction set for this processor is ARMv8-A, which enables support for newer software and technologies. With a lithography of 16 nm, it is manufactured with a more advanced process, resulting in increased efficiency. The Kirin 950 also packs in 2000 million transistors, indicating its ability to process complex instructions. Furthermore, it has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watt, which means it consumes less power while delivering high performance.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC7731E processor has a different set of specifications. It features a 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 architecture, offering a lower clock speed compared to the Kirin 950. With 4 cores, it may not handle multitasking as efficiently as the Kirin 950, but it can still provide decent performance for basic tasks. The instruction set of this processor is ARMv7-A, not as advanced as the ARMv8-A found in the Kirin 950. Additionally, the lithography for the SC7731E is 28 nm, which is a less efficient manufacturing process compared to the 16 nm of the Kirin 950. The TDP for this processor is 7 Watt, meaning it consumes slightly more power than the Kirin 950.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 outperforms the Unisoc SC7731E in terms of processing power. It has a higher clock speed, more advanced architecture, lower lithography, and a lower TDP. Therefore, the Kirin 950 is capable of handling more complex tasks efficiently and consuming less power compared to the SC7731E. However, if the requirements are basic computing tasks, the Unisoc SC7731E can still deliver satisfactory performance. Ultimately, the choice between these processors would depend on the specific needs and budget of the user.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 1.3 GHz – Cortex-A7 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv7-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 7 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 1 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 533 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Midgard |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 600 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 1 |
Shaders | 64 | 4 |
DirectX | 11.2 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 1440x720 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 8MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | HD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.3 Gbps | |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 4 (802.11n) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2015 November | 2018 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi3650 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 850 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8000
3
Samsung Exynos 9610 vs Samsung Exynos 7870
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 vs MediaTek Helio G70
5
MediaTek Dimensity 820 vs Unisoc Tiger T610
6
MediaTek Helio G36 vs MediaTek Dimensity 720
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs MediaTek Helio P95
8
MediaTek Helio G80 vs MediaTek Helio G85
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 782G
10
Samsung Exynos 9810 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8020