HiSilicon Kirin 950 vs Unisoc Tiger T616
The HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc Tiger T616 are two processors that offer different specifications and features. Let's compare them based on their specifications.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it features an architecture of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This architecture allows for a balance between performance and power efficiency. The processor is built on a 16 nm lithography process and contains 2000 million transistors. With a TDP of 5 Watts, it is designed to consume less power and provide longer battery life. The instruction set used is ARMv8-A, which offers support for the latest technologies and enhancements.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 features an architecture of 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This architecture is focused on providing good performance for everyday tasks while still maintaining power efficiency. The processor is built on a 12 nm lithography process, which allows for better performance and improved power efficiency compared to the Kirin 950. With a TDP of 10 Watts, it consumes slightly more power than the Kirin 950. The instruction set used is ARMv8.2-A, which brings additional enhancements and features compared to the ARMv8-A.
In terms of core count, both processors have 8 cores, which means they can handle multiple tasks efficiently.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc Tiger T616 offer different strengths in terms of performance and power efficiency. The Kirin 950 focuses on a balanced approach, while the Tiger T616 emphasizes performance. The lithography process, instruction set, and TDP also play a crucial role in determining the overall performance and power consumption of the processors. Depending on the specific requirements and use cases, users can choose the processor that best suits their needs.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 950, it features an architecture of 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. This architecture allows for a balance between performance and power efficiency. The processor is built on a 16 nm lithography process and contains 2000 million transistors. With a TDP of 5 Watts, it is designed to consume less power and provide longer battery life. The instruction set used is ARMv8-A, which offers support for the latest technologies and enhancements.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T616 features an architecture of 2x 2.0 GHz Cortex-A75 and 6x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. This architecture is focused on providing good performance for everyday tasks while still maintaining power efficiency. The processor is built on a 12 nm lithography process, which allows for better performance and improved power efficiency compared to the Kirin 950. With a TDP of 10 Watts, it consumes slightly more power than the Kirin 950. The instruction set used is ARMv8.2-A, which brings additional enhancements and features compared to the ARMv8-A.
In terms of core count, both processors have 8 cores, which means they can handle multiple tasks efficiently.
Overall, the HiSilicon Kirin 950 and Unisoc Tiger T616 offer different strengths in terms of performance and power efficiency. The Kirin 950 focuses on a balanced approach, while the Tiger T616 emphasizes performance. The lithography process, instruction set, and TDP also play a crucial role in determining the overall performance and power consumption of the processors. Depending on the specific requirements and use cases, users can choose the processor that best suits their needs.
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 2.0 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 6 GB |
| Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
| Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 1866 MHz |
| Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
| Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
| GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G57 MP1 |
| GPU Architecture | Mali Midgard | Mali Bifrost |
| GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 750 MHz |
| Execution units | 4 | 1 |
| Shaders | 64 | 16 |
| DirectX | 11.2 | 11 |
| 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 64MP, 2x 32MP |
| Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | FullHD@60fps |
| Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 |
H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) |
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 | 2021 |
| Partnumber | Hi3650 | T616 |
| Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
| Positioning | Flagship | Mid-end |
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 678 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G
2
MediaTek Helio G92 Max vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 6 Gen 1
3
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Samsung Exynos 990
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Gen 3 vs MediaTek Dimensity 900
5
MediaTek Dimensity 9400 vs Samsung Exynos 9825
6
MediaTek Dimensity 700 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
7
MediaTek Dimensity 6300 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8500
8
MediaTek Helio G90 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 4
9
Samsung Exynos 2100 vs Samsung Exynos 1480
10
Samsung Exynos 7904 vs Google Tensor G3