HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
The HiSilicon Kirin 955 and the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G are both powerful processors that offer impressive specifications. However, there are significant differences between the two, especially in terms of architecture, lithography, transistor count, and neural processing capabilities.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 955, it features a 16 nm lithography, making it quite efficient in terms of power consumption. This processor has a total of 8 cores, with 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. The instruction set used is ARMv8-A, which ensures compatibility with various software. With a TDP of 5 Watts, it offers a balance between performance and power efficiency. The Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors, allowing for smooth and efficient data processing.
In contrast, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G boasts more advanced specifications. It has a 5 nm lithography, indicating a significant improvement in power efficiency compared to the Kirin 955. The processor also has 8 cores, with 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. These cores deliver excellent performance and energy efficiency. The Kirin 9000E 5G utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, enhancing compatibility with newer software. With a TDP of 6 Watts, it offers slightly higher power consumption compared to the Kirin 955. The Kirin 9000E 5G also impresses with a massive 15300 million transistors, enabling even faster and more efficient data processing.
Furthermore, the Kirin 9000E 5G stands out for its neural processing capabilities. It incorporates Ascend Lite and Ascend Tiny neural processing units, as well as the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. These features contribute to enhanced AI performance and efficient machine learning tasks.
In summary, while the HiSilicon Kirin 955 is a capable processor with solid specifications, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G outshines it with its more advanced lithography, increased transistor count, and improved neural processing capabilities. The Kirin 9000E 5G offers superior performance and power efficiency, making it an excellent choice for users who require high-performance computing and AI capabilities in their devices.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 955, it features a 16 nm lithography, making it quite efficient in terms of power consumption. This processor has a total of 8 cores, with 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. The instruction set used is ARMv8-A, which ensures compatibility with various software. With a TDP of 5 Watts, it offers a balance between performance and power efficiency. The Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors, allowing for smooth and efficient data processing.
In contrast, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G boasts more advanced specifications. It has a 5 nm lithography, indicating a significant improvement in power efficiency compared to the Kirin 955. The processor also has 8 cores, with 1x 3.13 GHz Cortex-A77 core, 3x 2.54 GHz Cortex-A77 cores, and 4x 2.05 GHz Cortex-A55 cores. These cores deliver excellent performance and energy efficiency. The Kirin 9000E 5G utilizes the ARMv8.2-A instruction set, enhancing compatibility with newer software. With a TDP of 6 Watts, it offers slightly higher power consumption compared to the Kirin 955. The Kirin 9000E 5G also impresses with a massive 15300 million transistors, enabling even faster and more efficient data processing.
Furthermore, the Kirin 9000E 5G stands out for its neural processing capabilities. It incorporates Ascend Lite and Ascend Tiny neural processing units, as well as the HUAWEI Da Vinci Architecture 2.0. These features contribute to enhanced AI performance and efficient machine learning tasks.
In summary, while the HiSilicon Kirin 955 is a capable processor with solid specifications, the HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G outshines it with its more advanced lithography, increased transistor count, and improved neural processing capabilities. The Kirin 9000E 5G offers superior performance and power efficiency, making it an excellent choice for users who require high-performance computing and AI capabilities in their devices.
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 + Ascend Tiny, 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 MP22 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Valhall |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 760 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 22 |
Shaders | 64 | 352 |
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
Qualcomm Snapdragon 888 Plus vs Samsung Exynos 9611
2
Apple A12 Bionic vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F
3
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs MediaTek Helio G25
4
Samsung Exynos 9825 vs MediaTek Helio P95
5
MediaTek Dimensity 8200 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8000
6
MediaTek Dimensity 1080 vs MediaTek Helio G95
7
Apple A15 Bionic vs MediaTek Dimensity 820
8
Google Tensor G2 vs Google Tensor G3
9
Unisoc Tiger T310 vs HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G
10
MediaTek Helio P60 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 690