HiSilicon Kirin 960 vs Unisoc SC7731E
The HiSilicon Kirin 960 and the Unisoc SC7731E are two distinct processors with varying specifications. Let's compare these processors based on their specifications.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 960 offers a more advanced architecture with 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc SC7731E features 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 cores, which are less powerful compared to the Kirin 960.
The number of cores also differs between these processors. The Kirin 960 boasts an impressive 8 cores, whereas the SC7731E has 4 cores. More cores generally indicate better multitasking capabilities and improved performance.
In terms of instruction set, the Kirin 960 utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set, which is a more advanced instruction set compared to the ARMv7-A instruction set used by the SC7731E. The ARMv8-A architecture offers better performance and efficiency.
The lithography of the processors is another factor to consider. The Kirin 960 has a lithography of 16 nm, which is a smaller and more efficient node compared to the 28 nm lithography of the SC7731E. Smaller lithography enables better power efficiency and improved performance.
The TDP (Thermal Design Power) of a processor indicates its maximum power consumption and heat generation. The Kirin 960 has a TDP of 5 Watts, while the SC7731E has a slightly higher TDP of 7 Watts. A lower TDP generally implies better power efficiency.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 960 outperforms the Unisoc SC7731E in terms of CPU architecture, the number of cores, instruction set, lithography, and TDP. The Kirin 960 offers a more powerful and efficient processing capability compared to the SC7731E, making it a superior choice for tasks that require advanced performance.
In terms of CPU cores and architecture, the HiSilicon Kirin 960 offers a more advanced architecture with 4x 2.4 GHz Cortex-A73 cores and 4x 1.8 GHz Cortex-A53 cores. On the other hand, the Unisoc SC7731E features 4x 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 cores, which are less powerful compared to the Kirin 960.
The number of cores also differs between these processors. The Kirin 960 boasts an impressive 8 cores, whereas the SC7731E has 4 cores. More cores generally indicate better multitasking capabilities and improved performance.
In terms of instruction set, the Kirin 960 utilizes the ARMv8-A instruction set, which is a more advanced instruction set compared to the ARMv7-A instruction set used by the SC7731E. The ARMv8-A architecture offers better performance and efficiency.
The lithography of the processors is another factor to consider. The Kirin 960 has a lithography of 16 nm, which is a smaller and more efficient node compared to the 28 nm lithography of the SC7731E. Smaller lithography enables better power efficiency and improved performance.
The TDP (Thermal Design Power) of a processor indicates its maximum power consumption and heat generation. The Kirin 960 has a TDP of 5 Watts, while the SC7731E has a slightly higher TDP of 7 Watts. A lower TDP generally implies better power efficiency.
In summary, the HiSilicon Kirin 960 outperforms the Unisoc SC7731E in terms of CPU architecture, the number of cores, instruction set, lithography, and TDP. The Kirin 960 offers a more powerful and efficient processing capability compared to the SC7731E, making it a superior choice for tasks that require advanced performance.
CPU cores and architecture
Architecture | 4x 2.4 GHz – Cortex-A73 4x 1.8 GHz – Cortex-A53 |
4x 1.3 GHz – Cortex-A7 |
Number of cores | 8 | 4 |
Instruction Set | ARMv8-A | ARMv7-A |
Lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
Number of transistors | 4000 million | |
TDP | 5 Watt | 7 Watt |
Memory (RAM)
Max amount | up to 6 GB | up to 1 GB |
Memory type | LPDDR4 | LPDDR3 |
Memory frequency | 1866 MHz | 533 MHz |
Memory-bus | 2x32 bit |
Storage
Storage specification | UFS 2.1 | eMMC 5.1 |
Graphics
GPU name | Mali-G71 MP8 | Mali-T820 MP1 |
GPU Architecture | Bifrost | Midgard |
GPU frequency | 900 MHz | 600 MHz |
Execution units | 8 | 1 |
Shaders | 128 | 4 |
DirectX | 11.3 | 11 |
OpenCL API | 1.2 | 1.2 |
OpenGL API | ES 3.2 | |
Vulkan API | 1.0 | 1.0 |
Camera, Video, Display
Max screen resolution | 1440x720 | |
Max camera resolution | 1x 20MP, 2x 12MP | 1x 8MP |
Max Video Capture | 4K@30fps | HD@30fps |
Video codec support | H.264 (AVC) H.265 (HEVC) VP8 VP9 |
H.264 (AVC) |
Wireless
4G network | Yes | Yes |
5G network | Yes | Yes |
Peak Download Speed | 0.6 Gbps | |
Peak Upload Speed | 0.15 Gbps | |
Wi-Fi | 5 (802.11ac) | 4 (802.11n) |
Bluetooth | 4.2 | 4.2 |
Satellite navigation | BeiDou GPS Galileo GLONASS |
BeiDou GPS GLONASS |
Supplemental Information
Launch Date | 2016 October | 2018 Quarter 2 |
Partnumber | Hi3660 | |
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 730G vs Samsung Exynos 7420
2
Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Plus Gen 1 vs HiSilicon Kirin 820 5G
3
Samsung Exynos 2200 vs MediaTek Dimensity 1000 Plus
4
MediaTek Helio P90 vs HiSilicon Kirin 960
5
Samsung Exynos 8895 vs MediaTek Helio A25
6
Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 vs MediaTek Dimensity 9000 Plus
7
MediaTek Helio G95 vs MediaTek Helio P35
8
Unisoc Tiger T618 vs MediaTek Dimensity 8000
9
Samsung Exynos 9610 vs HiSilicon Kirin 980
10
MediaTek Dimensity 8020 vs Samsung Exynos 1330