HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 955 and HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G are two processors with different specifications. Let's compare them in terms of CPU cores and architecture, lithography, number of transistors, TDP, and additional features.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G has 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The Kirin 9000 5G has newer and faster Cortex-A77 cores compared to the Kirin 955, offering better performance.
Moving on to lithography, the Kirin 955 is built on a 16 nm process, whereas the Kirin 9000 5G utilizes a more advanced 5 nm process. The smaller lithography allows for increased transistor density and potentially better power efficiency.
Speaking of transistors, the Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors, while the Kirin 9000 5G boasts a significant 15300 million transistors. The Kirin 9000 5G's higher transistor count indicates a more complex and powerful processor.
When it comes to Thermal Design Power (TDP), the Kirin 955 consumes 5 Watts, while the Kirin 9000 5G utilizes 6 Watts. Although the Kirin 9000 5G has a slightly higher TDP, it offers more advanced features that may justify the increase in power consumption.
Lastly, the Kirin 9000 5G includes additional features not present in the Kirin 955. It incorporates neural processing units, namely Ascend Lite (2x) and Ascend Tiny (1x), along with HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. These enhancements enable improved AI and machine learning capabilities.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G surpasses the Kirin 955 in terms of CPU performance, lithography, transistor density, and additional features. However, it consumes slightly more power. The Kirin 9000 5G offers a significant upgrade in terms of specifications and capabilities, making it a more advanced and powerful processor compared to the Kirin 955.
Starting with the CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G has 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. The Kirin 9000 5G has newer and faster Cortex-A77 cores compared to the Kirin 955, offering better performance.
Moving on to lithography, the Kirin 955 is built on a 16 nm process, whereas the Kirin 9000 5G utilizes a more advanced 5 nm process. The smaller lithography allows for increased transistor density and potentially better power efficiency.
Speaking of transistors, the Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors, while the Kirin 9000 5G boasts a significant 15300 million transistors. The Kirin 9000 5G's higher transistor count indicates a more complex and powerful processor.
When it comes to Thermal Design Power (TDP), the Kirin 955 consumes 5 Watts, while the Kirin 9000 5G utilizes 6 Watts. Although the Kirin 9000 5G has a slightly higher TDP, it offers more advanced features that may justify the increase in power consumption.
Lastly, the Kirin 9000 5G includes additional features not present in the Kirin 955. It incorporates neural processing units, namely Ascend Lite (2x) and Ascend Tiny (1x), along with HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. These enhancements enable improved AI and machine learning capabilities.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G surpasses the Kirin 955 in terms of CPU performance, lithography, transistor density, and additional features. However, it consumes slightly more power. The Kirin 9000 5G offers a significant upgrade in terms of specifications and capabilities, making it a more advanced and powerful processor compared to the Kirin 955.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 3.13 GHz – Cortex-A77 3x 2.54 GHz – Cortex-A77 4x 2.05 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 5 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | 15300 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 6 Watt |
Neural Processing | Ascend Lite (2x) + Ascend Tiny (1x), HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0 |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 16 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR5 |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 2750 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 4x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 3.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G78 MP24 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 760 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 24 |
Shaders | 64 | 384 |
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 | 3840x2160 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | 4K@60fps |
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 | 4.6 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 2.5 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 |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2016 April | 2020 October |
Partnumber | Hi3655 | |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Flagship |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
MediaTek Helio A25 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 636 vs Apple A11 Bionic
3
Samsung Exynos 7870 vs HiSilicon Kirin 960
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855
6
Google Tensor G2 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 670
7
Apple A10X Fusion vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 870
8
MediaTek Dimensity 8200 vs Samsung Exynos 8895
9
Unisoc SC9832E vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G
10
HiSilicon Kirin 710 vs MediaTek Helio P35