HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs Unisoc Tiger T310
The HiSilicon Kirin 955 and the Unisoc Tiger T310 are two processors with varying specifications. The HiSilicon Kirin 955 features an architecture consisting of 4x 2.5 GHz Cortex-A72 and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores, providing a total of 8 cores. In comparison, the Unisoc Tiger T310 has 1x 2 GHz Cortex-A75 and 3x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A55 cores, totaling to 4 cores.
In terms of instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 utilizes ARMv8-A, while the Unisoc Tiger T310 employs the more advanced ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This suggests that the Unisoc Tiger T310 may have newer features and optimizations compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 955.
Moving on to lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a 16 nm lithography, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T310 has a slightly smaller 12 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally indicates improved power efficiency and potentially better performance.
When considering the number of transistors, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 boasts 2000 million transistors, while the Unisoc Tiger T310 does not provide this information. While the difference in transistor count alone does not necessarily determine performance, it may suggest that the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a more intricate and complex design.
Finally, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watt, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T310 does not provide this information. A lower TDP typically implies better power efficiency and less heat generation, which can potentially enhance the overall user experience.
In conclusion, both the HiSilicon Kirin 955 and the Unisoc Tiger T310 have their own set of specifications that differentiate them from each other. The HiSilicon Kirin 955 offers more cores and provides information on the number of transistors and TDP, while the Unisoc Tiger T310 features a newer instruction set and boasts a smaller lithography. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors would depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user.
In terms of instruction set, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 utilizes ARMv8-A, while the Unisoc Tiger T310 employs the more advanced ARMv8.2-A instruction set. This suggests that the Unisoc Tiger T310 may have newer features and optimizations compared to the HiSilicon Kirin 955.
Moving on to lithography, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a 16 nm lithography, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T310 has a slightly smaller 12 nm lithography. A smaller lithography generally indicates improved power efficiency and potentially better performance.
When considering the number of transistors, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 boasts 2000 million transistors, while the Unisoc Tiger T310 does not provide this information. While the difference in transistor count alone does not necessarily determine performance, it may suggest that the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a more intricate and complex design.
Finally, the HiSilicon Kirin 955 has a TDP (Thermal Design Power) of 5 Watt, whereas the Unisoc Tiger T310 does not provide this information. A lower TDP typically implies better power efficiency and less heat generation, which can potentially enhance the overall user experience.
In conclusion, both the HiSilicon Kirin 955 and the Unisoc Tiger T310 have their own set of specifications that differentiate them from each other. The HiSilicon Kirin 955 offers more cores and provides information on the number of transistors and TDP, while the Unisoc Tiger T310 features a newer instruction set and boasts a smaller lithography. Ultimately, the choice between the two processors would depend on the specific requirements and priorities of the user.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
1x 2 GHz – Cortex-A75 3x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A55 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv8.2-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 12 nm |
Number of transistors | 2000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 4 GB | up to 4 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR4X |
Memory frequency | 1333 MHz | 1333 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit | 2x16 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.0 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Imagination PowerVR GE8300 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Rogue |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 660 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 2 |
Shaders | 64 | 32 |
DirectX | 11.2 | 10 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 3.0 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.2 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 1600x720 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 31MP, 2x 13MP | 1x 16MP + 1x 8MP |
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 | 2016 April | 2019 April |
Partnumber | Hi3655 | T310 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Low-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Qualcomm Snapdragon 870 vs MediaTek Helio P95
2
MediaTek Dimensity 1200 vs Unisoc Tiger T612
3
Google Tensor G1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820
4
HiSilicon Kirin 930 vs Unisoc Tiger T700
5
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 vs MediaTek Helio A25
6
Apple A17 Pro vs MediaTek Helio G90
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 vs MediaTek Dimensity 6020
8
HiSilicon Kirin 710F vs Samsung Exynos 9825
9
Unisoc Tanggula T740 5G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G
10
Samsung Exynos 9611 vs MediaTek Dimensity 820