HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs HiSilicon Kirin 960
The HiSilicon Kirin 955 and Kirin 960 are both processors designed by HiSilicon Technologies, a subsidiary of Huawei. While they share several similarities, there are also key differences in their specifications.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, both processors feature 8 cores and support the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, there are differences in the architecture of their cores. The Kirin 955 has 4 Cortex-A72 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. On the other hand, the Kirin 960 boasts 4 Cortex-A73 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. These differences in architecture and frequencies can have an impact on the processors' performance.
When it comes to the fabrication process, both processors are manufactured using a 16 nm lithography. This allows for a more efficient use of power and increased performance compared to previous generations.
One notable difference between the Kirin 955 and Kirin 960 is the number of transistors. The Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors, whereas the Kirin 960 has double that amount with 4000 million transistors. This increase in transistors indicates a more complex and advanced design, which can result in better overall performance and efficiency.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 5 Watts. This means that they are designed to operate within this power range, which is a critical factor for mobile devices where battery life is important.
Overall, while the Kirin 955 and Kirin 960 share similarities in terms of the number of cores, instruction set, lithography, and TDP, the Kirin 960 offers advancements in core architecture and an increased number of transistors. These enhancements are likely to result in improved performance and overall efficiency, making the Kirin 960 a more powerful choice for those looking for a high-performance processor.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, both processors feature 8 cores and support the ARMv8-A instruction set. However, there are differences in the architecture of their cores. The Kirin 955 has 4 Cortex-A72 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. On the other hand, the Kirin 960 boasts 4 Cortex-A73 cores clocked at 2.4 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. These differences in architecture and frequencies can have an impact on the processors' performance.
When it comes to the fabrication process, both processors are manufactured using a 16 nm lithography. This allows for a more efficient use of power and increased performance compared to previous generations.
One notable difference between the Kirin 955 and Kirin 960 is the number of transistors. The Kirin 955 has 2000 million transistors, whereas the Kirin 960 has double that amount with 4000 million transistors. This increase in transistors indicates a more complex and advanced design, which can result in better overall performance and efficiency.
In terms of power consumption, both processors have a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 5 Watts. This means that they are designed to operate within this power range, which is a critical factor for mobile devices where battery life is important.
Overall, while the Kirin 955 and Kirin 960 share similarities in terms of the number of cores, instruction set, lithography, and TDP, the Kirin 960 offers advancements in core architecture and an increased number of transistors. These enhancements are likely to result in improved performance and overall efficiency, making the Kirin 960 a more powerful choice for those looking for a high-performance processor.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
Number of cores | 8 | 8 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 16 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | 4000 million |
TDP | 5 Watt | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 6 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4 |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 1866 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | UFS 2.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G71 MP8 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 900 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 8 |
Shaders | 64 | 128 |
DirectX | 11.2 | 11.3 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 20MP, 2x 12MP |
Max Video Capture | FullHD@60fps | 4K@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 | 0.6 Gbps |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.05 Gbps | 0.15 Gbps |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 5 (802.11ac) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2016 April | 2016 October |
Partnumber | Hi3655 | Hi3660 |
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 675 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480
3
Apple A16 Bionic vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000E 5G
4
Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 460
5
Apple A12 Bionic vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus
6
MediaTek Dimensity 1000 Plus vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 768G
7
Samsung Exynos 850 vs Samsung Exynos 1380
8
MediaTek Helio G36 vs HiSilicon Kirin 950
9
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1080
10
Samsung Exynos 9820 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G