HiSilicon Kirin 955 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
The HiSilicon Kirin 955 and the Unisoc Tiger T618 are two processors that have distinct specifications. Let's compare their key features.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 955, it is equipped with an architecture that includes four Cortex-A72 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and four Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. This octa-core processor boasts a 16 nm lithography with 2000 million transistors. It operates on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T618 processor has a different architecture with two Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz and six Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. Its lithography is slightly smaller at 12 nm, and it also operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. The TDP for this processor is 10 Watts.
One distinguishing feature of the Unisoc Tiger T618 is the inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit (NPU). This component is specifically designed for tasks related to artificial intelligence and machine learning, giving it an advantage in certain applications that heavily rely on these technologies.
In terms of core count, both processors have eight cores in total, making them quite capable for multitasking and handling demanding processes. However, it's important to note that the core configurations differ between the two processors.
Regarding the lithography, a smaller value signifies a more advanced manufacturing process. In this case, the Unisoc Tiger T618 has an edge with its 12 nm lithography compared to the Kirin 955's 16 nm lithography. This could potentially result in better power efficiency and thermal management on the Tiger T618.
While both processors demonstrate impressive specifications for their respective target markets, it ultimately depends on the specific needs and preferences of the user. The Kirin 955 may excel in certain computing tasks, while the Tiger T618's NPU enhances its AI capabilities. As with any processor comparison, it's important to evaluate performance benchmarks and real-world usage scenarios to determine the best fit for one's requirements.
Starting with the HiSilicon Kirin 955, it is equipped with an architecture that includes four Cortex-A72 cores clocked at 2.5 GHz and four Cortex-A53 cores clocked at 1.8 GHz. This octa-core processor boasts a 16 nm lithography with 2000 million transistors. It operates on the ARMv8-A instruction set and has a thermal design power (TDP) of 5 Watts.
On the other hand, the Unisoc Tiger T618 processor has a different architecture with two Cortex-A75 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz and six Cortex-A55 cores clocked at 2.0 GHz. Its lithography is slightly smaller at 12 nm, and it also operates on the ARMv8.2-A instruction set. The TDP for this processor is 10 Watts.
One distinguishing feature of the Unisoc Tiger T618 is the inclusion of a Neural Processing Unit (NPU). This component is specifically designed for tasks related to artificial intelligence and machine learning, giving it an advantage in certain applications that heavily rely on these technologies.
In terms of core count, both processors have eight cores in total, making them quite capable for multitasking and handling demanding processes. However, it's important to note that the core configurations differ between the two processors.
Regarding the lithography, a smaller value signifies a more advanced manufacturing process. In this case, the Unisoc Tiger T618 has an edge with its 12 nm lithography compared to the Kirin 955's 16 nm lithography. This could potentially result in better power efficiency and thermal management on the Tiger T618.
While both processors demonstrate impressive specifications for their respective target markets, it ultimately depends on the specific needs and preferences of the user. The Kirin 955 may excel in certain computing tasks, while the Tiger T618's NPU enhances its AI capabilities. As with any processor comparison, it's important to evaluate performance benchmarks and real-world usage scenarios to determine the best fit for one's requirements.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.5 GHz – Cortex-A72 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
2x 2.0 GHz – Cortex-A75 6x 2.0 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 |
Neural Processing | NPU |
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 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-T880 MP4 | Mali-G52 MP2 |
GPU Architecture | Midgard | Bifrost |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 850 MHz |
Execution units | 4 | 2 |
Shaders | 64 | 32 |
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 64M |
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 | 2016 April | 2019 August |
Partnumber | Hi3655 | T618 |
Vertical Segment | Mobiles | Mobiles |
Positioning | Flagship | Mid-end |
AnTuTu 10
Total Score
GeekBench 6 Single-Core
Score
GeekBench 6 Multi-Core
Score
Popular comparisons:
1
Apple A16 Bionic vs Samsung Exynos 7880
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 vs Samsung Exynos 7884B
3
Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 vs Unisoc Tiger T618
4
Google Tensor G1 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7 Plus Gen 2
5
Apple A11 Bionic vs HiSilicon Kirin 990 4G
6
Samsung Exynos 9609 vs Samsung Exynos 980
7
Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835
8
MediaTek Helio G35 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9200 Plus
9
MediaTek Helio P95 vs Apple A10 Fusion
10
MediaTek Dimensity 1200 vs HiSilicon Kirin 9000 5G