HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs Unisoc Tiger T612
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc Tiger T612 are both processors designed for mobile devices. They have distinct specifications that set them apart in terms of performance and power efficiency.
Beginning with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it is equipped with 8 CPU cores. Its architecture comprises four 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and four 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This heterogeneous design enables the processor to handle both high-performance and power-saving tasks efficiently. With an ARMv8-A instruction set, the Kirin 950 boasts advanced programming capabilities. Furthermore, it is manufactured using a 16 nm process, resulting in smaller transistors and increased power efficiency. The processor consists of 2000 million transistors and has a low thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T612 also features 8 CPU cores. Its architecture comprises two 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and six 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Despite having a higher number of cores than the Kirin 950, the Tiger T612 does not offer the same level of performance. However, its ARMv8.2-A instruction set ensures compatibility with an array of software. Manufactured using a 12 nm process, this processor achieves a more compact size compared to the Kirin 950. Consequently, it has a TDP of 10 Watts.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc Tiger T612 cater to different market segments. The Kirin 950 excels in performance with its combination of high-performance and power-saving cores. It is also more power-efficient with a lower TDP. On the other hand, the Tiger T612 focuses on power efficiency with its architecture but may not offer the same level of performance as the Kirin 950. Nevertheless, both processors provide essential functionality for mobile devices and offer compatibility with the latest instruction sets. Ultimately, choosing between the two will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the intended application or device.
Beginning with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it is equipped with 8 CPU cores. Its architecture comprises four 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and four 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This heterogeneous design enables the processor to handle both high-performance and power-saving tasks efficiently. With an ARMv8-A instruction set, the Kirin 950 boasts advanced programming capabilities. Furthermore, it is manufactured using a 16 nm process, resulting in smaller transistors and increased power efficiency. The processor consists of 2000 million transistors and has a low thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T612 also features 8 CPU cores. Its architecture comprises two 1.8 GHz Cortex-A75 cores and six 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. Despite having a higher number of cores than the Kirin 950, the Tiger T612 does not offer the same level of performance. However, its ARMv8.2-A instruction set ensures compatibility with an array of software. Manufactured using a 12 nm process, this processor achieves a more compact size compared to the Kirin 950. Consequently, it has a TDP of 10 Watts.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc Tiger T612 cater to different market segments. The Kirin 950 excels in performance with its combination of high-performance and power-saving cores. It is also more power-efficient with a lower TDP. On the other hand, the Tiger T612 focuses on power efficiency with its architecture but may not offer the same level of performance as the Kirin 950. Nevertheless, both processors provide essential functionality for mobile devices and offer compatibility with the latest instruction sets. Ultimately, choosing between the two will depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the intended application or device.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 10 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 8 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 1600 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.2 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 650 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 1 |
Shaders | 64 | 16 |
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 | 2400x1080 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 50MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | FullHD@30fps |
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 | 0.3 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.1 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 | 2022 January |
Partnumber | Hi3650 | T612 |
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
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G
2
Apple A10X Fusion vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
3
MediaTek Dimensity 8000 vs MediaTek Helio G36
4
Samsung Exynos 990 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
5
MediaTek Dimensity 9200 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 888
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Plus Gen 2
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 5G
8
MediaTek Helio G90 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1
9
Samsung Exynos 980 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8020
10
Apple A11 Bionic vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 870