HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs Unisoc SC9832E
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc SC9832E are two processors that can be compared based on their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it is equipped with 8 cores, consisting of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53. This processor's architecture is based on ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 16 nm, indicating its advanced manufacturing process. Moreover, it is built with approximately 2000 million transistors, which allows for improved performance and efficiency. With a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watt, it shows a balance between power consumption and performance.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E features 4 cores, using 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 architecture. Like the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it also utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, it has a slightly larger lithography of 28 nm, indicating a less advanced manufacturing process compared to the Kirin 950. With a TDP of 7 Watt, it consumes more power than the Kirin 950, which could affect its overall efficiency.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 has superior specifications compared to the Unisoc SC9832E. It offers more cores and a higher clock speed, resulting in potentially better multitasking and overall processing power. Additionally, the Kirin 950's lithography of 16 nm and lower TDP of 5 Watt suggest improved energy efficiency compared to the SC9832E's 28 nm lithography and TDP of 7 Watt. These specifications indicate that the HiSilicon Kirin 950 may offer better performance and power efficiency compared to the Unisoc SC9832E.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it is equipped with 8 cores, consisting of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53. This processor's architecture is based on ARMv8-A instruction set and has a lithography of 16 nm, indicating its advanced manufacturing process. Moreover, it is built with approximately 2000 million transistors, which allows for improved performance and efficiency. With a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watt, it shows a balance between power consumption and performance.
On the other hand, the Unisoc SC9832E features 4 cores, using 4x 1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 architecture. Like the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it also utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, it has a slightly larger lithography of 28 nm, indicating a less advanced manufacturing process compared to the Kirin 950. With a TDP of 7 Watt, it consumes more power than the Kirin 950, which could affect its overall efficiency.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 has superior specifications compared to the Unisoc SC9832E. It offers more cores and a higher clock speed, resulting in potentially better multitasking and overall processing power. Additionally, the Kirin 950's lithography of 16 nm and lower TDP of 5 Watt suggest improved energy efficiency compared to the SC9832E's 28 nm lithography and TDP of 7 Watt. These specifications indicate that the HiSilicon Kirin 950 may offer better performance and power efficiency compared to the Unisoc SC9832E.
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 1.4 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
| Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
| Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-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 2 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
| Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 667 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 | Mali Midgard | Mali Midgard |
| GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 680 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 13MP |
| Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | FullHD@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 | 0.15 Gbps |
| Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 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 |
| Partnumber | Hi3650 | |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Flagship | Low-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
Samsung Exynos 9610 vs Samsung Exynos 8895
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
3
MediaTek Dimensity 6020 vs Apple A12 Bionic
4
HiSilicon Kirin 8000 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8050
5
MediaTek Helio G200 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 845
6
Apple A13 Bionic vs MediaTek Dimensity 7200
7
HiSilicon Kirin 9030 Pro vs HiSilicon Kirin 8020
8
MediaTek Dimensity 7025 vs Apple A18 Pro
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000
10
Qualcomm Snapdragon 430 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6300